PURCHASE OF GALVANIZED IRON AND STEEL, PRODUCTS FOR USE IN SOUTH VIETNAM

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070009-2
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 48
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: June 27, 2005
• Sequence Number: 9
• Publication Date: May 17, 1966
• Content Type: OPEN

May 17, 1966 Approved Ns&la
gI 10273
agNUE6R6961R-RFAN3Ricel46R000400070009-2
And we can't do it if the legal profession is
going continually to harass 'us with new
regulations and new proceedings which give
judges almost a mandate to muzzle the
press. It is a fight that affects every news-
paper in every city in America.
I don't for one minute condone trial by
newspapers. But let's get one thing clear,
let's get this straight: no civil right, includ-
ing the right of a fair trial, is worth a
tinker's dam unless it is protected by the
right of free expression. If an accused man
can't say his piece in court, cannot have
lawyers and friends plead his case, what good
is his so-called "civil right" to a fair trial?
Without the right of free expression, justice
would deteriorate into a tragic comedy.
When these two amendments clash?and it
seems they clash only when publicity-seek-
ing lawyers stage the collision?the First
Amendment must take precedence over the
Sixth Amendment, because without the First
Amendment, the Sixth Amendment would
become a mockery of justice.
Thank God we have in America hundreds
of judges in the high courts and in the lower
courts, many of them in this state, who
realize that freedom of expression is the
fundamental right of all liberty.
The world of 1966, like Peter Zenger's
world of 1735, is still engaged in mortal com-
bat with those who would be free and those
who would deny freedom to others; those
who believe people should have access to the
facts and those who are convinced they
know what is best for you and for me. So
long as the forces of freedom exist, we who
are privileged to be part of those forces must
resist arbitrary power and secrecy wherever
and whenever it appears. We must take our
stand on behalf of the people, all the people.
It is the only choice for those who cherish
freedom and justice. Liberty can be de-
stroyed by tyrannical government and tyran-
nical courts if the people can be threatened
or persuaded to abandon free speech and a
free press. Newspapers defend the right of
individuals against the entrenched power of
arrogant abuse by public officials. They fight
to bring the truth to light; to support jus-
tice and oppose injustice; to make certain
that every individual is treated equally be-
fore the law; to make certain that every
American can speak his piece without fear or
favor. Today the United States is the last
great bastion of liberty in the world, and a
free press in America is the last great bastion
of the people against complete domination
by government.
If newspapers will recognize their respon-
sibility, as well as their opportunity, to print
the truth; refuse to be intimidated; refuse
to bow to government bureaucracy; then they
will serve the highest cause of civilization.
which is individual freedom, the freedom of
choice and the right of free expression. As
partners in freedom, the people and the
press in America can save liberty.
Without the right of freedom for the indi-
vidual, without the right of free expression
for everyone, there can be no lasting or
satisfying progress for us in America. This
is the freedom we must cherish, this is the
freedom we must fight for, this is the free-
dom?if necessary?we must go to jail to
preserve. We must cherish it and hold it
the dearest thing in life, because if America
maintains its freedom, then sometime, some-
how, America, being free, will show the rest
of the world the road to freedom. This I
believe, my friends, is the divine mission of
America?freedom for ourselves and even-
tually freedom for all the world.
And because it is our special mission we
should remind ourselves every morning that
"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty."
In closing, I want to salute the University
of Arizona for its vision and wisdom in recog-
nizing the great contribution Peter Zenger
and his wife Anna made to the cause of
freedom. And again a thousand grateful
thanks for this awaXd.
Good luck and God bless all of you.
PURCHASE OF GALVANIZED IRON
AND STEEL PRODUCTS FOR USE
IN SOUTH VIETNAM
Mr. BAYH. Mr. President, during the
past few months I have made inquiries
into the Agency for International De-
velopment procurement procedures for
galvanized iron and steel products being
purchased for use in South Vietnam.
My investigation turned up a number of
improprieties in the procurement pro-
cedure. These improprieties have been
confirmed by reports from the Govern-
ment Accounting Office and the Agency
for International Development. It is
apparent that the AID program in South
Vietnam has grown to such degree that
the operations officials for AID in the
Far East are unable to properly control
it.
The subject of my investigation has
been galvanized iron and steel prod-
ucts?a commodity which accounts for
only 10 percent of the total commercial
import program. Information which
has been developed during my inquiry
indicates that the problems which have
been documented in galvanized iron and
steel exist throughout the supporting
assistance program.
I do not seek to be critical of AID, but
to offer constructive advice which will
enable the Agency to properly administer
their vital function in Vietnam.
Our economic assistance program has
grown to such scope so quickly that the
AID mission has not been able to prop-
erly oversee their program. This is
despite the tremendous efforts put forth
by the members of the Agency.
Profiteering businessmen in Saigon are
having a field day at our expense. They
are requesting licenses for the import of
commodities which will sell best and at
the best rate of profit, without any true
regard for the needs of the people.
Essential commodities being imported
with priority licenses are being diverted
to nonessential, but more profitable uses.
Because of the tremendous difference of
the official and real exchange rates be-
tween American and Vietnamese cur-
rency, huge profits are being made simply
through currency manipulation on the
sale of AID financed goods. Kickbacks
are being required by importers. Goods
are being left in the valuable warehouse
space along Saigon's crowded docks for
weeks and months at a time while im-
porters speculate that the prices of the
Items will go up before they take title.
These problems require the immediate
attention of our most skilled manage-
ment people. I have today addressed a
letter to Mr. David Bell, Administrator
of the Agency for International Devel-
opment, suggesting the immediate dis-
patch of a high level task force of man-
agement and economic specialists who
can analyze the difficult situation which
exists and recommend programs of man-
agement which could be put into effect
quickly to minimize the problems which
exist there today.
At this point I would like to insert a
copy of the letter so that my feelings on
this matter may be properly represented
to my colleagues.
There being no objection, the letter
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
U.S. SENATE,
May 17, 1966.
Hon. DAVID BELL,
Administrator, Agency for International De-
velopment, Washington, D.C.
DEAR DAVE: My inquiry into the procure-
ment practices of the supporting assistance
program of the Agency for International De-
velopment for South Vietnam has generated
a grave concern over the administrative tasks
of our A.I.D. mission in Saigon.
In Vietnam, A.I.D. faces problems unlike
any in its history. The swift, sudden in-
crease in the scope of the assistance effort
being programed in a war zone in an atmos-
phere of commercial anarchy challenges the
proven methods of A.I.D. management and
presents seemingly insurmountable obstacles
for the meager staff of your mission there.
It is apparent to me that the size of the
AID, effort has outstripped the mission's
ability to control the situation. Unscrupu-
lous and prat minded businessmen are
taking advantage of our assistance program
to make money at the expense of the Viet-
namese economy.
The law of profitability has replaced the
law of need in determining products for im-
port and sale in the country. Essential
products are being diverted from priority and
uses to uses which are non-essential but
more profitable. Profits are being taken
through currency manipulation on the sale
of AID, financed goods. Kickbacks to buy-
ers is commonplace.
It is essential that AID, move quickly to
bring the Vietnam assistance program under
better control. With anticipated expendi-
tures of more than $570 million projected for
the coming fiscal year, it is imperative that
actions be taken to bring order to the chaotic
conditions which exist there.
To insure that AID. dollars are spent in
a manner most effective in the stabilization
of the national economy of South Vietnam,
it is important that the following adminis-
trative programs be developed imm4diately.
(1) Improved guidelines to determine the
qualities and varieties of goods procured un-
der the Commodity Import Program be es-
tablished. This is needed to insure that only
those goods essential to the welfare of the
national economy be brought in under AID.
finincing and that realistic quantities of the
goods be purchased.
(2) Improved qualitative standards should
be developed to insure that goods of service-
able and lasting quality be supplied to the
Vietnamese people.
(3) Additional safeguards against corrupt
business practices should be instituted to
protect suppliers and end users against un-
scrupulous business activity.
(4) More accurate information on inven-
tories and shipments of A.ID, financed goods
should be developed and maintained.
(5) Procedures should be developed to cut
down on the variances of market prices be-
tween official and unofficial exchange rates
on items financed by A.I.D. so that profits
from currency manipulation can be halted.
I realize the enormity of the task facing
AID, and sincerely hope that the challenges
of our extensive South Vietnam program can
be met. I suggest that you immediately
recruit a small task force of management and
economic specialists, who can quickly an-
alyze the problems in South Vietnam, pre-
pare methods of management control, and
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
10274 Approved For Rele8KG2IMPALCMPEB_O_oggivr000moo9-2
develop a program of staff and equipment
riamirementh for the mission.
fetich a task force should include persons
with capabilities in commercial experience in
trade with oriental small business concerns,
inventory and supply management, banking
add comm.ercial exchange, economic projec-
tion, engineering and quality control and
0 fel processing.
bailey? a group of competent American
Inesinesssa rid educational leaders could make
ench an analysis and submit proposals to you
within the next 30 days, which would sub-
a.ntially improve the current situation, I
pledge my support for Whatever realistic pro-
posals for administrative staff and equipment
that are indicated necessary by such a task
force and will work in the Congress to pro-
vide you with the tools neceseary for effective
atiministration of our Vietnem program.
With beet wishes.
ecerely,
Ilittea BAvii,
US. Senator.
Mr. WWII. Mr. President, the prob-
lem which exists in Vietnam is very diffi-
cult, but I am confident that American
management skills can be applied to
them so that they can be brought under
control in order that our AID program
will reflect the integrity of our Govern-
ment and the dollars invested made
more efficient so that those people of
Vietnam will truly profit from them.
THE URGENT NEED FOR MORE IN-
VORMATION ON JOB VACANCIES
Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, the
need for more information on job vacan-
cies has been pointed out a number of
Limes in recent years by Members of
Congress. economists, and others con-
cerned with unemployment problems.
The joint Economic Committee's Sub-
committee on Economic Statistics, of
which I am chairman, following up its
recommendations of 1.962 in a report on
"Employment and Unemployment," is
currently holding hearings on the feasi-
bility of regular collection and reporting
of job vacancy statistics and their po-
tential usefulness in formulating man-
power policy at the local and national
Thi;; morning we have heard from
three individuals who can speak with
great authority in this field: Frank H.
Cassell, Director of the 'U.S. Employment
Services: Commissioner of Labor Sta-
tistics Arthur M. Ross; and Vladimir D.
Chavrid, Director of the Office of Man-
power Analysis and Utilization.
',WAN H. CASSELL ?USES
the subject is so important and the
need for support so urgent that I think
Members will be interested now in a few
excerpts froin this testimony es-aphasia-
inn the MC'S of job vacancy information.
Ciiesell underlined the value at
Lists Lme of job vacancy information,
making these points:
. The identification of skin shortages
'torts) fl occupations and industries has be-
come extremely important in recent months
as tile trained supply of workers continues to
ity providing information on the
;iature ot a viilable job opportunities and
iMe? imbalances which exist on a local area
fess is between the kinds of workers needed
and. the skins of available workers, the job
vecency program can be of (fonsiderable use
La ti-se Employment Service operationally in
filling current openings and in alleviating
skill shortages through training, restructur-
hag jobs, encouraging relaxation of employer
specifications, and special recruitment
campaigns.
2. The manpower legislation of the 1960's
requires detailed knowledge of ;lob opportu-
nities in specific labor areas across the coun-
try to provide suitable vocational objectives
in training or retraining portions of our
work force. This legislation includes, in
addition to the Manpower neycopment and
Training Act and the Vocations l Education
Act, the Economic Opportunity fret of 1964?
and the array of anti poverty programs relat-
ed to it?as well as the Public Works and
Economic Development Act of 1065. In con-
junction with other occupational informa-
tion tools, job vacancy information can help
fulfill the requirements of some aspects of
Lids legislation by assisting in the design of
Improved programs for the retraining of
workers with obsolescent skills those who
wish to upgrade their skills, or those who
have no marketable skills at all.
3. Some desirable jobs at semiskilled and
even unskilled levels are currently hard-to-
fill. These could serve as entsy level-jobs
for "poverty" group workers who lack requi-
site skills and education to meet qualifica-
tion standards for higher level jobs. Con-
siderable interest in such job opportunities
identified by the vacancy survess has come
from the Office of Economic Oppertunity, the
President's Commission on Civil Rights, and
Plans for Progress employers, all of whom are
attempting to fit disadvantaged workers into
productive and satisfying employment.
4. Comprehensive Information on job op-
portunities, by occupation and area can help
eliminate pockets of unemployment which
exist because of lack of skills, geographic
isolation, cultural disadvantages, and other
obstacles to the matching of workers and
jobs. It provides the raw data c-n job pros-
pects needed by the Employment service to
encourage worker mobility, and to provide
information useful in counseliag younger
workers and students and guiding them to-
ward occupational choices that provide bet-
ter prospects: for employment.
5. The economy has already entered a pe-
riod of manpower stringency,, although short-
ages are still of the "spot" variety rather
than nationwide in scope. If this, trend con-
tinues, and if the Vietnam conflict makes
further demands on the economy, we may
need to give further emphasis to ways and
means of identifying the industries and areas
experiencing the most pressing manpower
shortages, to methods which employers can
use to facilitate the elimination or manpower
bottlenecks, and to manpower programs
needed to insure the most effective develop-
ment and use of human resources. The job
vacancy program provides an imp,srtant data
reeourse for these purposes.
ARTHUR M. :Er OSS?BLS
Cuimnissioner Ross noted that there
Lap many collateral uses for sach infor-
mation. For example, it may have sig-
nificance as a leading indicator of busi-
ness conditions. A ilumber of foreign
countries have found job vacancy figures
by area and occupations useful for
analyzing the causes of unemployment
and determining needed corrective meas-
ures. I think his com.ments on the ana-
lytical Uses of job vacancy information
particularly worthy of attention by the
Members of Congress who must give leg-
islative supomt to the collection of this
information. I include a portion of his
excellent statement:
1. Job vacancy information. can be used to
develop a picture of the size and character-
istics of unfilled demand for labor. Such
information can then be analyzed in its own
May 1 2' , 1.966
right, just as many useful analyses are made
of the size and characteristics of unemploy-
ment.
2. Trends in job vacancies, especially if
classified by occupation, can be of consid-
erable value in throwing light on the ability
of our economy to adjust to changes in 1,he
demand for labor. They may serve es a
lead indicator of changing economic condi-
tions.
3. Job vacancy information, when used in
conjunction with information on employ-
ment, unemployment, labor turnover, and
hours of work, can enhance our ability to
analyze the current economic situation .for
light on major policy decisions that have
to be made in dealing with unemployment,
labor shortages, and inflation. I shall dis-
cuss this in more detail below.
4. In the present economic situation, the
question of labor shortages has become suf-
ficiently critical, especially in relation to
skilled manpower, that the President, as
previously indicated, has asked the Depart-
ment of Labor to watch the situation close-
ly and to prepare regular roper's. I hey?
already pointed out that much of our evi-
dence on labor shortages is indirect and
circumstantial. We could do a much bet-
ter job if we had direct evidence on lebor
shortages through measures of job -vacancies
classified by occupation, industry' and area.
5. Job vacancy information, will throw
additional light on demand-supply condi-
tions in the job market in relation to
changing wage levels. Analyses; of the ef-
fect of employment changes upon wage rates,
although potentially very useful in appra-s-
ing wage developments and policy, has not
exhibited highly precise results when ap-
plied to data available for the Meted States.
The additional dimension of job vacancies
in the measurement of labor demand would
contribute another powerful tool of analysis.
6. Job vacancy data-can help us t,o sharpen
the Bureau of Labor Statistics' projections of
manpower requirements by occupation which
are so essential in developing estimates of
training needs to guide in the planning of
the many education and training programs
supported by the Federal Government. ITp
to now, these projections have been besnd
on analysis of past trends in manpower re-
quirements as measured by employment. We
have recognized that in so far as there is
unsatisfied demand for labor, the figures on
employment are an imperfect measure of 0i-
mand for labor.
7. Job vacancy information (sea be used
by business firms to get a picture of the sirea
within which they are recruiting workers,
and to help in developing more effective re-
cruiting policies. This would be especially
valuable to firms considering new plant
locations.
3. Such information could be of C d
value to labor organizations in evaluatirg
the demand for the services of their membeas
and in developing policies for training. ep-
prenticeship, and collective bargaining.
In meeting these analytical needs more :re-
formation is required than merely the nen,-
ber of vacancies. We need to know Lou
many of the jobs employers are on rig to rill
have be-en vacant only briefly, and lloW many
of them represent hard-to-fill jobs. "Sim
latter may indicate Imbalances lietw.ieri
supply and demand, resulting .1'i'i,n a cW -
parity between the skills needed incluse zy
and the skills available among unemploy sd,
workers in the community. They may also
reflect unrealistic hiring standards, or low
wage rates and unfavorable comiltione (If
employment. To get insight into tile,e $int? -
Lions we need job vacancy data eeparately
for each local area, and by specific occupa-
tion. We also need information on wares
to see what proportion of the yeeencies ere
offered at wage levels below prevailing en ley
rates for the occupation in the communi
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
Approved ForettSs,Taa_g9M0A/R:fit-MS67BRIOATFRO0400070009-2,-
may 17, 1966
10262
Few other Senators?and no others from
Illinois?have ever made similar disclosure
LEGALITY OF U.S. POSITIO
VIETNAM
Mr. MILLER. Mr. President, in the
May 1966 issue of the American Bar
Association journal there is published
an article entitled "The Legality of the
U.S. Position in Vietnam," written by
Eberhard P. Deutsch, chairman of the
American Bar Association Committee on
Peace and Law Through the United Na-
tions.
Mr. President, this article is the most
learned and scholarly I have seen on this
subject. It expresses very well, I believe,
the background on the basis of which the
American Bar Association's House of
Delegates adopted unanimously a reso-
lution at its midwinter meeting in Chi-
cago last February, to the effect that the
United States is legally in Vietnam.
Mr. Deutsch shows that the points
made in the article are supported by 31
outstanding professors of international
law at the leading law schools through-
out the country.
I believe that anyone who has any
doubts on this particular subject will
find it very illuminating to read the ar-
ticle, and I ask unanimous consent to
have it printed in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
[From the American Bar Association Journal,
May 1966]
THE LEGALITY OF THE UNITED STATES POSITION
IN VIETNAM
(By Eberhard P. Deutsch, Chairman of the
American Bar Association Committee on
Peace and Law Through United Nations)
By the Geneva Accords of 1954, the com-
manders in chief of the French Union Forces
in Indochina, on the one hand, and of the
People's Army of Vietnam, on the other,
established the 17th parallel as the military
demarcation line between North and South
Vietnam, with a demilitarized zone on each
side of the line. They stipulated that the
armed forces of each party were to respect
the demilitarized zone and the territory of
the other zone, and that neither zone was
to be used "for the resumption of hostilities
or to further an aggressive policy"? The ac-
cords additionally provided for the creation
of an International Commission, composed of
India (chairman) , Poland and Canada, to
supervise the agreements.'
In 1962 the International Commission re-
ported, with approval, findings of its Legal
Committee to the effect that "there is evi-
dence to show that arms, armed and unarmed
personnel, munitions and other supplies have
been sent from the Zone in the North to the
Zone in the South with the objective of sup-
porting, organizing and carrying out hostile
activities, including armed attacks, directed
against the Armed Forces and Administra-
tion of the Zone in the South", and that the
People's Army Of Vietnam "has allowed the
Zone in the North to be used for inciting,
encouraging and supporting hostile activities
Agreement on the Cessation of Hostilities
in Viet Nam, I0/42/Rev. 2, July 20, 1954 (the
first of the Geneva Accords. The others, not
irnmediately relevant, dealt with Laos and
Cambodia respectively), Art. 19.
Id., Chap. VI, Arts. 29, 34 at seq.
in the Zone in the South aimed at the over-
throw of the Administration in the South".'
The evidence further demonstrates that
the aggression by North Vietnam against
South Vietnam (the Republic of Vietnam)
had been going on unabashedly since the
signing of the Geneva Accords and that
North Vietnam had consistently violated
those accords from their inception. An offi-
cial State Department report recites:
"While negotiating an end to the Indo-
china War at Geneva in 1954, the Commu-
nists were making plans to take over all for-
mer French territory in Southeast Asia.
When Viet-Nam was partitioned, thousands
of carefully selected party members were or-
dered to remain in place in the South and
keep their secret apparatus intact to help
promote Hanoi's cause. Arms and ammuni-
tion were stored away for future use.""
It is important to bear in mind that nei-
ther the Republic of (South) Vietnam nor
the United States is a party to the Geneva
Accords, and that while the United States
participated in the discussions leading up
to the accords, it did not sign the final dec-
laration. However, during the last plenary
session of the Geneva Conference on July
21, 1954, Under Secretary of State Walter
Bedell Smith, head of the United -States
delegation, said in an official statement that
his Government "would view any renewal of
the aggression in violation of the aforesaid
agreements with grave concern and as seri-
ously threatening international peace and
security".'
On September 8, 1954, just a few weeks
after the Geneva Accords were executed, the
Southeast Asia Collective Defense (SEATO)
Treaty was signed. Parties to it were the
United States, Great Britain, Australia, New
Zealand, Thailand, Pakistan and the Philip.,
pines. The United States Senate ratified
the treaty on February 1, 1955, by a vote of
82 to 1.0 It took effect on February 19, 1955.,
Paragraph 1 of Article IV of the SEATO
Treaty provides that each party thereto "rec-
ognizes that aggression by means of armed
attack in the treaty area against any of the
Parties or against any State or territory
which the Parties by unanimous agreement
may hereatfer designate, would endanger its
own peace and safety, and agrees that it will
in that event act to meet the common danger
in accordance with its constitutional proc-
esses" ? By a protocol to the treaty executed
on the same day, the parties "unanimously
designate [d] for the purposes of Article IV
* * * the free territory under the jurisdic-
tion of the State of Vietnam"?'
'Special Report of the International Com-
mission for Supervision and Control in Viet
Nam, Saigon, June 2, 1962, para. 9; reprinted
in Hearings Before the Senate Foreign Rela-
tions Committee on S. 2793, 89th Cong., 2d
Sess. 736 (1966) , hereinafter cited as Hear-
ings. The Polish delegation dissented.
4 Aggression from the North, 52 DEPT STATE
BULL. 404,424 (1965) .
'31 DEP'T STATE BULL. 162-163 (1954).
101 CONG. REC. 1060 (1955) .
6 U.S.T. & O.I.A. 81, T.I.A.S. No. 3170. The
treaty is reproduced in 101 CONG. REC. 1049
(1955) and 111 STAFF OF SENATE COMM. ON
FOREIGN RELATIONS, 89th CONG., 2D SESS.,
BACKGROUND INFORMATION RELATING TO
SOUTHEAST ASIA AND VFETNAM 70-74 (Comm.
Print 1966).
Southeast Asia and the Southwest Pacific,
Article VIII.
Execution of the treaty by the United
States was "with the understanding that its
recognition of the effect of aggression and
armed attack and its agreement with refer-
ence thereto in Article IV, paragraph 1, apply
only to communist aggression . . .". Supra
note 7, signatory clause.
10 The protocol is annexed to the treaty.
The SEATO Treaty was made by the parties
in a reiteration of "the faith in the purposes
and principles set forth in the Charter of the
United Nations","" nothing in which, accord-
ing to Article 52 thereof, "precludes the
existence of regional arrangements or agen-
cies for dealing with such matters relating
to the maintenance of international peace
and security as are appropriate for regional
action . . .". Article 53 of the charter pro-
vides that "no enforcement action shall be
taken under regional arrangements or by re-
gional agencies without the authorization of
the Security Council . . .". These two arti-
cles are at the head of Chapter VIII.
The preceding chapter (VII) deals with
"Action with Respect to Threats to the Peace,
Breaches of the Peace, and Acts of Aggres-
sion". The first twelve articles (39 to 50,
inclusive) of that chapter prescribe the
measures to be taken by the Security Coun-
cil to meet "any threat to the peace, breach
of the peace or act of aggression". By the
last article (51) of that chapter, it is stip-
ulated expressly that "nothing in the present
Charter shall impair the inherent right of
individual or collective self-defense if an
armed attack occurs against a Member of
the United Nations, until the Security Coun-
cil:has taken measures necessary to maintain
international peace and security".
It was clearly with these provisions of
Articles 51 and 52 of the Charter of the
United Nations in mind that, in Article IV
of the SEATO Treaty, each party thereto
agreed that it would "act to meet the com-
mon danger" in the event of "aggression by
means of armed attack [anywhere] in the
treaty area" (Southeast Asia and the South-
west Pacific). "Enforcement action" is clear-
ly action to enforce decisions of the Security
Council under Articles 39 to 50 of Chapter
VII of the charter. Equally clearly, "en-
forcement action" does not include measures
of "individual or collective self-defense".
So that when Article 53 of the charter. pro-
vides that "no enforcement action shall be
taken under regional arrangements . . .
without the authorization of the Security
Council", it does not refer to such measures
of "self-defense" as are contemplated under
the SEATO treaty, particularly in light of
the explicit recital of Article 51 of the
charter that "nothing in the present Charter
shall impair the inherent right of individual
or collective self-defense".
DECLARATION STATES PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT
The "Final Declaration of the Geneva Con-
ference", issued on July 21, 1954, the same
day on which the Geneva Accords were
signed, states:
"The Conference recognizes that the
essential purpose of the agreement relating
to Viet Nam is to settle military questions
with a view to ending hostilities and that
the military demarcation line is provisional
and should not in any way be interpreted as
constituting a political or territorial bound-
ary." 12
It was by no means contemplated, how-
ever, that there was to be no ultimate par-
tition of Vietnam. On the contrary, the very
next article (7) of the final declaration pro-
vided expressly that the political problems
of "independence, unity and territorial in-
tegrity" were to be determined by free elec-
tions, internationally supervised. That ar-
ticle reads "that, so far as Viet-Nam is con-
cerned, the settlement of political problems,
effected on the basis of respect for the prin-
ciples of independence, unity and territorial
integrity, shall permit the Vietnamese people
to enjoy the fundamental freedoms, guar-
11 Prefatory clause,
IC/43/Rev. 2, July 21, 1954; reprinted in
BACKGROUND INFORMATION, supra note 7,
page 66.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29: CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070009-2
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
May 17, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE /0261
News, describing PAUL DOUGLAS' own will-
ingness to disclose his entire financial
picture.. These articles indicate con-
clusively that PAUL DOUGLAS is beholden
to no group and, above all, treasures his
Public office as a public trust.
I ask unanimous consent to insert these
articles in the REcorm.
There being no objection, the articles
were ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as: follows:
f Urom the Chicago American, Apr. 29, 1966]
DOUGLAS DD;CLOSES HIS 1965 laicoma
lax: $5,007
(By itobert Gruenberg)
W II NGTON - Senator DOUGLAS paid the
internal revenue service $5,007 on a taxable
income of $22,020 in 1965.
His total income was $35,537. but deduc-
tions and exemptions totaling $13,517 brought
Chit taxable portion down to $22,020.
The Illinois Democrat is gathering detailed
figures, to be made public soon, to explain
his income and tax.
Publicizing these figures has become a reg-
ular practice for the Senator in the last 3
years.
The current move probably will arouse the
resentment of some of his Senate colleagues.
I/OuGLAS, with his New England background
and his emphasis over the years on economy
and. ethics in government I he wrote a book
about it in 1953, has projected an image of
which invites the hostility of his more afflu-
ent, free-spending colleagues.
sttAKEN BY DODD CASE
They are befioming more sensitive and
shaken over developments in the case of
Senator TuomAs J. DODD, Democrat of
Ct inn ecticut.
Dorm is the object of a Senate ethics com-
mittee investigation over charges that he
received more than $100,000 from three fund-
raising dinners and used the money for per-
:coital expenses.
TI, bad been widely believed that the events
were for the purpose of gathering campaign
money.
In justification, a number of senators have
pointed out that it is becoming increasingly
difficult to make ends meet on a senator's
aalary of $30,000 annually.
imuGLAS TELLS VIEW
In Washington, which can be a city of high
costs-especially if you're a senator-extra
amerces of IDEOI/le are necessary, it was
indicated.
Asked about this, Senator Doi:midis said:
"I lived on $30,000 a year without a subsidy.
lived on $22,500 a year without a subsidy,
and on $15,000 a year without one."
The last two figures are the previous sal-
aries of senators before they were raised.
DOUGL.AS did en joy extra income, he
acknowledged-but it did not come from
"testimonial dinners." It came from numer-
ous rounds of lecturing, the former Chicago
alderman and university professor explained.
EXPLAINS FEE POITCY
As 111.8 senatorial income increased, how-
ever, his lecturing decreased, he said. Even
while on the lecture circuit, he would not ac-
cept fees from special interest groups who
might seek his help on legislation beneficial
Ii 'jr cause,
te did accept fees, he said, from university
groups, citizens forams, and other relatively
tampartinan groups.
IfouorAs recalled that once he accepted a
lee from the Union League club.
"I felt the Union League club should sup-
pert good Republicans, so I turned around
end gave the fee to (Senators] WAYNE MORSE,
P:ORGE AIKF.N, and Charles Tobey," DOUGLAS
laughed. Mos E: of Oregon is a former Re-
publican. and AIKEN of Vermont is a "proges-
sive" Republican, as was the late Senator
Tobey of New Hampshire-, who died if; 1953.
DOUGLAS said his campaign monies are
handled by two committees. One is an inde-
pendent citizens committee, which receives
contributions and pays many of his expenses.
"It is completely insulated," he said, "from
my [personal] expenses, No money is given
to me for my personal expenses."
His second campaign fund is one on which
he makes a report to the ,secratary el the
Senate after each election.
The 1950 report showed DOUGLAS received
$1.1,027 in contributions, ami spent $39,830.
The difference, $196, went towards a post-
election dinner held for 165 of his mast ac-
tive campa,ign aids.
LIMIT ON GIFTS
DOUGLAS has a rule proli ibiting accept-
ance-by himself or his staff-of gifts ,., slued
at more than $2.50. It is an arbitrary figure
Which, he joked, "is not going up been use of
inflation."
Doncr.As' 1965 income conalsted of sa9,94,8
in senatorial salary and $2,270 from on an-
nuity, for a total of $32,218. To this was
added $8,050 in other income, for a tetal of
$40,268.
However, $4,731 in 'adjustments" and
"reimbursements" to this amouni,- --for
travel, communications, stationery and 'ental
of his Chicago office--brought the total down
to $35,537. Included in the $8,050 is income
from "other sources" where items re nging
from $3,025 for lectures, to $18.82 in roj'alties
on his book, "Ethics in Government."
!From the ChicagoD6VY jNIewsc Al-' 30,
196
DOUGLAS WILLINGLY SHOWS HIS RECoRns
(By Charles Nicodernus)
WAsenucroiv.--His wife does her own -aash-
lag, gardening and other housework, with-
out help from a maid.
They drive a 1960 Chevrolet.
At home, they entertain tittle, read a lot,
and try to get to bed early.
Until this year, he owned three suits ". .
until my wife and staff made me but four
more, so I wouldn't be among the nation's
10 worst-dressed men."
If none of that sounds like the gay, glam-
orous high life that many imters seem to
believe a U.S. Senator lives, I.hat's tor bad,
says Senator Ram, DOUGLAS, DeMOCTat Of Illi-
nois.
"T. live within my $30,000- a-year Senate
Income- with just a little extra from lee tures
and investments," says lilinces' senior sena-
tor.
"And if I didn't; live the way I do, I cot ildn't
stay within that income."
The question of whether a 'U.S. senator
can messily live on the money the public pays
him has become a hot issue in this :own,
since the disclosure of the problems of Sen-
ator TimmAs Donn, Democrat, of Connecticut,
and his personal use of what may or racy
not have been campaign funds, without pay-
ing taxes on them.
Doan is said, by his. staff, to have raised
nearly $200,000 since 1961 through esti-
monian dinners that his aides insist were
not campaign functions. Instead, it is con-
tended, they were affairs 011E1'1 to help ;Donn
raise cash to meet the binder some expenses
of life as a senator.
Those expenses-for travel, entertainment
and other political necessities-far c.ceed
DODD'S salary, his staff says.
Like most senators-particularly the Iljjem-
ocrats-DOLTGLAS is disinclined to sit in ,,uelg-
xnent, or comment directly on the problems
of his good friend, TONI DODD.
.But he does stress three points that sitv in
sharp contrast to Donn's posits in:
1. "I've never raised a penny for my own,
personal use-through 'testimonial dinners'
or any other device. I have enough trouble
raising campaign money, let alone caini for
anything else."
2. "I live on my salary and I always ;cave.
It's not easy, but it can be done."
3. "My finances are an open book. I've
always preached that the public has a might
to know the sources of income of their
elected representati ccs."
Some Senators, like DODD, admit then. they
can't live on $30,000 a year and still Ii.e as
they would like. Many have substantial
outside sources of income.
Others say they do live on $30,000 a y ar-
but refuse to discuss details of their private
finances, particularly with inquiring news-
men trying to check out reports that a t ens-
tor has sizable, unpublicizeci investmen' s
or income from, industries that come under
his legislative purview.
But not DOUGLAS.
He meets inquiries by pulling out Id, in-
come tax forms, his ledger books, his contri-
bution lists, and saying, "Here it all is."
Among his expenses are:
$4,051 for entertainment. That. incl tides
lunches and an occasional breakfast with
visiting constituents, open houses and re-
ceptions at his office suite, giving oat ball
point pens.
"Mrs. Douglas (former Congresswetrian
Emily Taft Douglas) and I do almost no en-
tertaining at home," he explains.
$3,211 for travel to and from Illinois. and
$3,000 for expenses during such trips. I/Min--
LAS rents a six-room apartment at 561,8 S.
Blackstone, for $180 a month, sublettinf five
rooms to his Chicago aid, Douglas Andesson,
and keeping one room for his personal use.
$3,500 for sending out his regularly broad-
cast senatorial reports, over radio and tele
vision.
$5,007 in income taxes, $800 in District of
Columbia taxes, and $250 in personal prop-
erty taxes paid in Chicago.
$516 for memberships and subscript; ons,
$2,722 for contributions to charity and simi-
lar causes, and $1,600 in political contribu-
tions.
"Public servants are always being -tapped
by charities-particularly by churches:' he
notes. "I'd like to do more, but I can't." As
for political contributions, "you have to do a
lot more in a general election year like
1964.
"I give to local Chicago and Illinois candi-
dates, mostly."
$1,368 in annual payments on his $!,.000
mortgage.
DOUGLAS lives in a tasteful but modest
three-bedroom stone house in an 'miner-
middle class section of Northwest W ss'h-
ington.
The house cost $28,000 when he hint it
built in 1955-plus $7,000 for the land, $1,,000
for a swimming pool and other extras, and
$10,000 for IV, adjoining lots he also bought
up.
"I got the down payment by silting
another, older house I had in the Disteet,
which had a $20,000 mortgage.
"I got the money for the pool by cashing In
a life insurance policy-and that pool has
been the best life insurance I have. It k,,cps
me healthy."
All those expenses total more than $26.090
a year.
Balanced against that is income of $3C 000
from the Senate, about $3.000 a year from
lectures ("I had to speak more WIWI) my
Senate salary was less"), $1,500 from bond
and stock investments, and $3,300 from two
annuities.
That totals $37,500.
"So I guess I have about $10,000 a year to
meet normal living expenses," DOUGLAS esti-
mates.
"It doesn't make for high living," he con-
cedes. "But it's a satisfying life-one I don't
hesitate to give the details of."
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
P6
May 17, 1966 Approved FotolLisImpsi9M0A2WEEN:6MpA4fER
000400070009-2
10263
anteed by democratic institutions estab-
lished as a result of free general elections
by secret ballot . . . under the supervision
of an international commission . .
It will be recalled that by the protocol to
the SEATO Treaty, South Vietnam ("the free
territory under the Jurisdiction of the State
of Viet Nam") was promised protection as
such under the treaty. Reference has since
been made to South Vietnam as a "protocol
state"?'
In addition to the reference in the con-
temporaneous protocol to the SEATO Treaty
to "the State of Viet Nam", the Republic of
(South) Vietnam "has been recognized as
a separate international entity by approxi-
mately sixty governments around the world.
It has been admitted as a member of several
of the specialized agencies of the United
Nations. In 1957, the General Assembly
voted to recommend South Viet Nam for
membership in the United Nations, and its
admission was frustrated only by the veto
of the Soviet Union In the Security
Council."'"
The, right of self-defense under Article 51
of the Charter of the United Nations is ex-
pressed to be unimpaired "if an armed attack
occurs against a Member of the -United Na-
tions", and it has been asserted by oppo-
nents of United States' policy in Vietnam
that this amounts to explicit denial of such
a right in the event of attacks against non-
members of the United Nations. A thesis
that members of the United Nations are not
permitted to participate in collective self-
defense to repel aggression, on the ground
that the aggrieved nation is not a member of
the United Nations, can hardly be supported
on its face, in reason, logic or law.16 Would
proponents of this doctrine suggest that
members of the United Nations would have
no right to assist Switzerland in self-defense
against a foreign invader?
But the right of self-defense has always
existed independently of the charter, and
that right is recognized expressly in Article
51. It is quite obvious that the charter
merely confirms, as to members of the United
Nations, the innate right of self-defense ap-
pertaining to both members and nonmem-
bers. Article 51 expressly retains, unimpaired,
the "inherent" right of ,both individual and
collective self-defense, thus implicitly recog-
nizing the independent existence of the right
of members to come to the aid of nonmem-
bers in collective self-defense against aggres-
sion, or attack "to maintain international
peace and security"? the very first purpose
Because of the North Vietnamese ag-
gression against South Vietnam, the contem-
plated elections were never held: "A nation-
wide election in these circumstances would
have been a travesty." Memorandum, The
Legality of United States Participation in the
Defense of Viet Nam, Department of State,
Office of the Legal Adviser, March 4, 1966,
page 33.
" See, for example, Hearings 463-465 and
Joint Southeast Asia Resolution, 78 Stat. 384,
approved August 10, 1964.
15Memorandum, supra note 13, page 12.
See also Vietnamese-United States Relations,
a Joint statement issued at Washington by
the President of the United States and the
President of Viet Nam, May 11, 1957, White
House Press Release. 36 DEP'T STATE BULL.
851-852 (1957).
" The principle that members of the United
Nations are legally entitled to participate in
collective self-defense of nonmembers is sus-
tained by leading authorities on interna-
tional law. BOWETT, SELF-DEFENSE IN INTER-
NATIONAL LAW 193-195 (1958); KELSEN, '1'HE
LAW OF THE UNITED NATIONS 793 (1950).
17 OPPENHEIM, INTERNATIONAL LAW, 297 et
seq. (8th (Lauterpacht) ed. 1955); JESSUP,
A MODERN LAW or NATiows 163 et seq. (1948).
No. 81 6
of the United Nations itself, as stated in the
charter?'
On August 7, 1964, the Congress adopted,
by a vote of 88 to 2 in the Senate and 416 to
0 in the House," the Joint Southeast Asia
Resolution, in which the preambular clauses
recite that "naval units of the Communist
regime in Vietnam, in violation of the prin-
ciples of the Charter of the United Nations
and of international law, have deliberately
and repeatedly attacked United States naval
vessels lawfully present in international
waters, and have thereby created a serious
threat to international peace": "these at-
tacks are part of a deliberate and systematic
campaign of aggression" against the South
Vietnamese "and the nations Joined with
them in the collective defense of their free-
dom".
The resolution then states "that the Con-
gress approves and supports the determina-
tion of the President, as Commander in Chief,
to take all necessary measures to repel any
armed attack against the forces of the United
States and to prevent further aggression";
that "the United States regards as vital to
its national interest and to world peace the
maintenance in international peace and
security in Southeast Asia"; and that "con-
sonant with the Constitution of the United
States and the Charter of the United Nations
and in accordance with its obligations under
the Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty,
the United States is, therefore, prepared, as
the President determines, to take all neces-
sary steps, including the use of armed force,
to assist any member or protocal state of
the Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty
requesting assistance in defense of its
freedom." 2?
In an address delivered at Gettysburg,
Pennsylvania, on April 4, 1959, President
Eisenhower declared that his administration
had reached "the inescapable conclusion that
our own national interests demand some
help from us in sustaining in Viet Nam the
morale . . . and the military strength nec-
essary to its continued existence in free-
dom".21 In a letter of December 14, 1961, to
the President of the Republic of Vietnam,
President Kennedy, recalling that the Com-
munist regime of North Vietnam had "vio-
lated the provisions of the Geneva Accords
. . . to which they bound themselves in
1954" and that "at that time, the United
States, although not a party to the Accords,
declared that it 'would view any renewal of
the aggression in violation of the agreements
with grave concern and as seriously threat-
ening international peace and security' ", as-
sured him that "in accordance with that
declaration, and in response to your request,
we are prepared to help the Republic of
Viet Nam . . to preserve its independ-
ence"?'
In President Johnson's message of August
5, 1964, to Congress, reporting the Communist
attacks on United States naval vessels in the
international waters of the Gulf of Tonkin,
he said:
". . . The North Vietnamese regime has
constantly sought to take over South Viet-
nam and Laos. This Communist regime has
violated the Geneva accords for Vietnam. It
has systematically conducted a campaign
of subversion, which includes the direction,
training, and supply of personnel and arms
for the conduct of guerrilla warfare in South
Vietnamese territory. . . . Our military and
economic assistance to South Vietnam and
Laos in particular has the purpose of help-
ing these countries to repel aggression and
strengthen their independence. The threat
la See footnote 16, supra.
" 110 CONG. REC. 18470-18471, 18555 (1964).
2078 Stat. 384, approved August 10, 1964.
21 40 DEP'T STATE BULL. 579-581 (1959).
22 46 DEP'T STATE BULL, 13-14 (1962).
to the free nations of southeast Asia has
long been clear".22
The Lawyers Committee on American
Policy Towards Vietnam questions whether
President Johnson's deployment of United
States forces to Vietnam can "be squared
with our Constitution * * * for, contrary to
widely held assumptions, the power to make
and conduct foreign policy is not vested
exclusively in the President, but is divided
between him and Congress * * *".2" In his
message of August 5, 1964, to the Congress,
President Johnson went on to say unequivo-
cally that "as Ptesident of the United States
I have concluded that I should now ask the
Congress on its part, to Join in affirming the
national determination that all such at-
tacks will be met, and that the United States
will continue in its basic policy of assisting
the free nations of the area to defend their
freedom." And the President forthrightly
requested that Congress adopt "a resolution
expressing the support of the Congress for
all necessary action to protect our armed
forces * * and to defend freedom and
preserve peace in Southeast Asia in accord-
ance with the obligations of the United
States under the Southeast Asia Treaty."
Two days later, on August 7, in response
to this message from the President, Congress
adopted the resolution quoted above, and on
August 10 the President signed it as Public
Law 88-408.
Article 51 of the Charter of the United Na-
tions, which provides that "nothing in the
present Charter shall impair the inherent
right of individual and collective self-de-
fense", requires that "measures taken by
Members in the exercise of this right of self-
defense shall be immediately reported to the
Security Council * * *". That the South-
east Asia collective Defense Treaty was made
under and ,in accordance with the Charter
of the United Nations, particularly Article
51, is evidenced by the provision of para-
graph 1 of Article IV of the treaty (by which
each party agreed to participate in defending
acts of aggression in the treaty area), that
"measures taken under this paragraph shall
be immediately reported to the Security
Council of the United Nations".
On August 5, 1954, Adlai E. Stevenson,
United States Representative to the United
Nations and the Security Council, advised
the council formally of two "deliberate
armed attacks" by North Vietnamese torpedo
boats against a naval unit of the United
States on the high seas. He declared that
"these wanton acts of violence and destruc-
tion" were simply part of "the sabotage of
the international machinery established to
keep the peace by the Geneva agreements?
and the deliberate, systematic and flagrant
violations of those agreements by two regimes
which signed them and which by all tenets
of decency, law and civilized practice are
bound by their provisions", all of which, he
said, "fit into the larger pattern of what has
been going on in Southeast Asia for the past
decade and a half".
Ambassador Stevenson assured the Secu-
rity Council that "we are in Southeast Asia
to help our friends preserve their own op-
portunity to be free of imported terror [and]
alien assassination, managed by the North
Viet-Nam Communists based in Hanoi and
hacked by the Chinese Communists from
Peiping". He affirmed solemnly "that the de,
ployments of additional U.S. forces to South-
east Asis are designed solely to deter further
aggression" .26
On February 7, 1965, Ambassador Steven-
son, by a letter to the President of the Se-
2,51 DEP'T STATE BULL. 261-263 (1964).
24 Hearings, Appendix 704-705.
26 Supra note 20.
2651 DEP'T STATE BULL. 272-274 passim
(1964).
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
10264 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD --SENATE May 17, 1(1
eurity Council, informed ti at body of "at-
tacks by the Viet Cong, which operates un-
der the military orders of North Vietnamese
authorities in Hanoi". He said the attacks
were part of an over-all plan "to make war
isgainst the legitimate government of South
Viet-Nam" in "violation of international law
and the Geneva Accords of 1954". He
stated also that, as required by paragraph 2
of Article IV of the Southeast Asia Treaty,
the United States and Vietnamese Govern-
ments had consulted immediately and had
agreed that it had become "necessary to take
prompt defensive action" to rceist "this con-
tinning aggression". He reported further
that the "counter meesurcs . . are a justi-
fied measure of self-defense' and that he
was "reporting the measures which we have
taken in accordance with our public commit-
ment to assist the Republic of Viet-Nam
against aggression from the North"af
Of particular interest at this point is
the reiterated assertion by the Lawyers Com-
mittee on American Policy Towards Vietnam,
phrased variously throughout its submission.,
that "only the Security Council . . is au-
thorized to determine the existence of
any . . act of aggression and . . . the
measures to be taken to maintain or restore
International peace"a. To the statements
quoted above which were made by Am-
bassador Stevenson in his letter of February
7, 1965, he added significantly: "We deeply
regret that the Hanoi regime, in its state-
ment of August 8, 1964, which was circulated
in Security Council Document S-5888, ex-
plicitly denied the right of the Security
Council to examine this problem." a.
Lass than three weeks later, in another
letter to the President of the Security Conn.-
cil, Ambassador Stevenson transmitted to
that body an extensive State Department re-
port entitled Aggression from the North.:
The Record of North Viet-Nam's Campaign
To Conquer South Viet-Nam, the facts recited
in which, Ambassador Stevenson submitted,
"snake it unmistakably clear that the char-
acter of that conflict is an aggressive war of
conquest waged against a neighbor?and
make nonsense of the cynical allegation that
this is simply an indigenous insurrection"....
Innumerable other reports, both formal
and informal, were made to the Security
Council by the representatives of the United
States at the United Nations; and there was
even one by President Johnson on July 28,
1965, bespeaking the continued efforts of
Secretary General U Thant to find a solu-
tion of the Vietnamese problem through the
United Nations. In the last of these reports
available as this article is written?two let-
ters of January 31, 1966, from Ambassador
Goldberg to the President of the Security
.1 52 DEP'T STATE BUM,. 240-241 passim
(1965).
Hearings, Appendix 695.
In a letter of July 30, 1965, from Arthur
J. Goldberg, who succeeded Amassador Ste-
venson as our Representative to the United
Nations and the Security Council, to the
President of the Security Council, he re-
peated, in sunstance, this statement. Am-
bassador Goldberg said: "It is especially un-
fortunate that the regime in Hanoi . . . has
denied the competence of the United Nations
to concern itself with tins dispute in any
manner, and has even refused to participate
in the discussions in the Council." United
States Mission to the United Nations, Press
Release 4610, July 30, 19615.
"52 :DEP'T STATE_ Bum,. 103, 419 (1965). It
is interesting to compare this statement by
Ambassador atevenson with the assertion of
the Lawyers Committee on American Policy
Towards Vietnam that "Ho Chi Minh can
compare his position in demanding union of
Vietnam with that of Lincoln, when Britain
and France were threatening to intervene to
assure the independence of the Confederacy".
Hearings, Appendix 692.
Council?it is requested "that an urgent
meeting of the Council be called promptly
to consider the situation in Viet Nam". A
draft resolution, calling ''for immediate dis-
cussions without preconditions . . among
the appropriate interested governments . . .
looking toward the application of the Geneva
accords , . and the establishment of a
durable peace in Southeast Asia", was trans-
ranted with the second al these letters for
coneideration by the council...
"We arc firmly convinced", said Ambassa-
dor Goldberg, "that in :ight of its obliga-
tions under the Charter to maintain interna-
tional peace and security . . . the Coun-
cil should address itself urgently and posi-
tively to this situation and exert its most
vigorous endeavors and its immense prestige
to finding a prompt solution to it.". De-
spite all prior, and this formal, us-gent sub-
mission of the Vietnamese problem to the
Security Council, it has never tiken any
action of any kind looking toward the res-
toration of international peace and security
to Southeast Asia. Neither has the council
expressed the slightest criticism of any ac-
tion taken by the United States in the
SEATO area..
In its memorandum in opposition to the
policy of the United States, the Lawyers
Committee on American Policy Towards Viet-
nam asserts that "the conduct of the U.S.
Government in Viet Nam appears plainly to
violate the terms of the Geneva Accords"..4
While the United States is not a; party to the
accords, did by contemporaneous unilat-
eral declaration agree, in effect, to respect
them. But, as demonstrated above, the
Geneva Accords since their inception have
been violated continuously by the Hanoi re-
gime. It is an accepted. principle of inter:-
national law that a material breach of a
treaty by one of the parties thereto dissolves
the obligations of the other pasta :as, at least
to the extent of withholding compliance un-
til the defaulting party purges its breach...
la United States Mission to the United Na-
tions Press Releases 47911 and 4799, January
31, 1966.
Id., Na. 4798.
11" Memorandum, supra note 13, page 20.
On February 2, 1966, the Security Council did
put the Vietnam question on its agenda at
the request of the United States. The vote
was nine in favor (Argentina, China, Japan,
Jordan, the Netherlands, New Zealand, United
Kingdom, United States and Uruettay); two
against (Bulgaria and the Soviet Union);
four abstentions (France, Mali, Nigeria and
Uganda).
Ambassadors Fedorenko of the Soviet
Union and Tarabanov of Bulgaria stated that
their governments "supported tie position
of" North Vietnam "that. the question be set-
tled within the Geneva Accords, and the
former added that the United States "was
trying to throttle the Struggle of the people
of South Vietnam for freedom and inde-
pendence". Ambasador Seydoux of France
insisted that the United Nations "was not
the proper framework for achieving a peace-
ful solution".
No further actioraliaz been taken- by the
Security Council, but by a letter of Febru-
ary 26, 1966, the president of the council ad-
vised its members that the differences of
opinion among them as to the problem of
Vietnam had "given rise to a general feeling
that it would be inopportune for the Council
to hold further debate at this time", but
"that the Council, having decided on Febru-
ary 2 to place on its agenda the item con-
tained in the letter of January 31 from the
Permanent Representative of the United
States, remained seized of the problem of
Viet-Nam." UN Monthly Chroniele, March,
1966, pages 3-10 passim.
Hearings, Appendix 702.
OPPENHEIM, op. cit. supra eote, 17, at
136, 137. See draft Arti sae 42 of the LAW or
TREATIES by the International Low COMMIS-
It has been suggested that because the
power to declare war is vested by the Consti-
tution in the Congress alone, the deployment
of United States forces to Vietnam by the
President, without a formal Congressional
declaration of war, violates the constitutional
fiat When the phrasing of this clause of the
Constitution was being considered at the con-
vention in 1787, its original form, vasting in
Congress the power to "make" war, wes
changed to give it the power to "declare"
war, "leaving to the Executive the power to
repel sudden attacks"?"he should be able
to repel and not to commence wet" and "Le
'conduct' it which was an Executive func-
tion"...
The President is, under section 2 of arti-
cle IT of the Constitution, the "Commander
In Chief of the Army and Navy of the Unit ed
States". Throughout the history of the
United States, he has been deemed to have
authority to deploy the country's military
forces to trouble spots around the world, fre-
quently in combat. The Department of
State has a record of some 125 such in-
stances...,
In the last analysis, however, the exercise
of the President's power as Commander ism
Chief in deploying forces of the Unit ed State:;
to Southeast Asia for the defense of the Re--
public of Vietnam has the repeated sanction
of the Senate, as well as of the Congress as
a whole, so that, although the situr lion now
seems unquestionably to constitute war in
its technical sense, a formal Camel-cation:A
verbal declaration of war as such could not
conceivably be essential to clothe the Presi-
dent's conduct with constitutional validity.
This Congressional sanction has been evi-
denced by overwhelming majorities in th3
Senate's approval of the SEATO Treaty, in
the adoption of the Joint Congressional
Southeast Asia resolution of Angus., 10, 1954,
and in the passage of the appropriations
necessary to carry on the defensite actioes
undertaken by the Executive.
First, as to the treaty. In it (paragraph 1,
Article IV) each of the parties "recognizes
that aggression by means of armed attack in
the treaty area against" any of theni or
against the "free territory under she juris-
diction of the State of Viet-nam" (protocol)
"would endanger its own peace and safety".
The "treaty area", under Article VIII? in-
cludes "the general area of the Southwest
Pacific not . . north of 21 degrees 30 min-
utes north latitude". The United States
has historically owned tremendously im-
portant and valuable strategic territorial in-
terests in that area. Aside from its truslee-
ship over the Mariana (except Guam),
Marshall and Caroline Islands, tlie United
States owns Guam, Wake and the Samoan
group. And yet the Lawyers Committee on
American Policy Towards Vietnam has ee-
serted that "SEATO is not a regional ageecy
within the letter or spirit of the UN
Charter", because "Articles 51 and 53 .
envisaged regional systems which historically
and geographically developed into I regions-1
community?not contemplating a regional
system which fused . . . Southeast Ada wit's
a country of the North American Conti-
nent"--"separated by oceans and thousaads
of miles from South East Asia"...
In the cited paragraph of the treaty, the
United States agreed that in the event of
aggression in the treaty area it se nuld "act
to meet the common danger". isi receni-
mending ratification of the treaty to the
Senate, its Foreign Relations Committee re-
sion in the report of its fifteenth session,
May 6 to July 12, 1963. U.N. GEN. ABS. OFF,
REC. 18th Sess., Supp. No. 9, (A/5509).
al 2 FARRAND, RECORDS OF THE 'FEDERAL CON -
VENTION 318-319.
See State Department Position i'aper pre-
pared for the Senate Committee on Foreign
Relations, November 19, 1965, BACKGROUND
INFORMATION, supra note 7, at 254.
Hearings, Appendix 693.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
Approved Feblft vgApflunw6ftigDPg-Mitt6R000400070009-2
Mays' 17, 1966 10265
torted that "the committee is not impervious
to the risks which this treaty entails. It fully
appreciates that the acceptance of these obli-
gations commits the United States to a
course of action over a vast expanse of the
Pacific. Yet these risks are consistent with
our own highest interests."" The Senate
ratified the treaty on February 1, 1955, by a
vote of 82 to 1.4?
In light of all of the foregoing, it seems
difficult to find anything in the nature of an
adequate foundation for the ipse dixit of the
Lawyers Committee an American Policy
Towards Viet Nam that the 'Southeast Asia
Collective Defense Treaty?connecting the
United States with Southeast Asia, archi-
tectured by Secretary of State Dulles, is a
legalistic artificial formulation to circum-
vent the fundamental limitations placed by
the United Nations Charter on unilateral
actions by individual members"."
Undoubtedly the clearest and most un-
equivocal Congressional sanction of the Pres-
ident's deployment of United States forces
for the defense of South Vietnam is contained
In the Joint Southeast Asia resolution of
August 10, 1964, reciting expressly "that the
Congress approves and supports the deter-
mination of the President, as Commander in
Chief, to take all necessary measures to repel
any armed attack against the forces of the
,United States and to prevent further aggres-
sion", and that the United States is "pre-
pared, as the President determines, to take
all necessary steps, including the use of
armed force, to assist any member or proto-
col state of the Southeast Asia Collective De-
fense Treaty requesting assistance in defense
of its freedom"."
The Lawyers' Committee on American
Policy Toward Viet Viet Nam quotes a passage
from an article in the Washington Daily News
of June 4, 1965, by Richard Starnes, read into
the Congressional Record by Senator ERNEST
GRUENING of Alaska, which states that the
joint resolution was "passed in the fever of
indignation that followed" the Gulf of
Tonkin attacks, and then, again as their own
ipse dixit, assert that "there is no evidence
that Congress thought or understood that it
was declaring war"."
This statement is simply incorrect. When
the President sent his message to Congress
on August 5, 1964, recommending passage
of "a resolution expressing the support of
Congress for all necessary action to protect
our 'Armed Forces and to assist nations cov-
ered by the SEATO Treaty", he stated ex-
plicitly that he "should now ask the Con-
gress on its part, to join in affirming the
'national determination that all such at-
tacks will be met, and that the United States
will continue in its basic policy of assisting
the free nations of the area to defend their
freedom"."
In the course of a colloquy on the floor
of the Senate on August 6, 1964, between
Senator JOHN SHERMAN COOPER of Kentucky
and Senator J. WILLIAM FULBRIGHT of Ar-
kansas, Chairman of the Foreign Relations
Committee which recommended passage of
the resolution," the following discussion (ex-
cerpts) took place:
"S. REP., 84th Cong., 1st Sess. 15 (1955).
Senator WAYNE MORSE of Oregon, as a mem-
ber of the committee, concurred in this
report.
'5 Supra note 6. The negative vote was that
of Senator William Langer of North Dakota.
Senator MORSE voted for ratification of the
treaty on the floor of the Senate where he
stated, after ratification of the treaty, that
"there is no doubt in my mind that the
treaty is in conformity with the United Na-
tions Charter". 91 CONG. REC. 1060 (1965).
"Hearings, Appendix 693.
42 Supra note 20.
43 Hearings, Appendix 710.
"51 DEP'T STATE BULL. 261-263 (1964).
"S. REP., 88th Cong., 2d Sess. (1964).
"Senator COOPER. Are we now [by this reso-
lution] giving the President advance au-
thority to take whatever action he may deem
necessary respecting South Viet-nam and its
defense, or with respect to the defense of
any other country included in the treaty?
"Senator FULBRIGHT. I think that is cor-
rect.
"Senator COOPER. Then, looking ahead, if
the President decided that it was necessary
to use such force as could lead us into war,
we would give that authority by this reso-
lution?
"Senator FULDRIGHT. That is the way I
would interpret it"."
Senator MORSE himself called the resolu-
tion "a predated declaration of war","
which would, somewhat enigmatically, give
"to the President what I honestly and sin-
cerely believe is an unconstitutional power
. . . to make war without a declaration of
war"." The enigma in this puzzling concept
seems to arise from the rather simple and
logical hypothesis that the function of a
legislative "declaration of war" is to au-
thorize the executive "to make war". Since,
by Senator MORSE'S own statement, the res-
olution authorizes the President "to make
war", it surely has the same legal effect as
a Congressional "declaration of wax" in haec
verba would have had."
Actually, while two or three members of
the Senate expressed doubt RS to whether
the resolution was intended to go as far as
it did, there was no real question about it.
Senator MORSE himself made extended
speeches agianst it, repeatedly warning his
colleagues as to its dire import, in such
words as that it "does go beyond the in-
herent authority of the President to act in
the self-defense of our country and does vest
in him authority to proceed to carry out a
campaign that amounts in fact to the wag-
ing of war."
In the course of a recent debate on the
floor of the Senate on a bill for an appro-
priation in support of the military forces
in Vietnam, Senator RICHARD B. RUSSELL of
Georgia, Chairman of the Armed Forces
Committee, said:
"I knew that the joint resolution conferred
a vast grant of power upon the President. It
is written in terms that are not capable of
misinterpretation, and about which it is dif-
ficult to become confused, * * * The lan-
gauge could not have been drawn more clear-
ly. Personally, I would be ashamed to say
that I did not realize what I was voting for
when I voted for that joint resolution. It
is only one page in length. It is clear. It is
explicit. It contains a very great grant of
power." 51
During the hearings on that appropriation
bill before the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee on February 18, 1966, Senator
MORSE asked Secretary of State Rink whether
he thought that the vote on the Southeast
Asia Resolution "would have been the same
If my colleagues in the Senate had contem-
plated that it might lead to 200,000 or 400,000
or 600,000 American troops in South Viet
Nam?" The Secretary replied: "I doubt very
much that the vote would be substantially
different."
In response to that, Senator MORSE com-
mented that there would be "a chance next
week to find out. * * * I intend to offer [a
rescission resolution] as an amendment to
the pending business in the Senate." 52 On
March 1 Senator MORSE offered his amend-
"110 CONG. REC. 18409 (1964).
"id. at 18427.
"Id. at 18443.
"When I use a word", Humpty Dumpty
said in a rather scornful tone, "it means just
what I choose it to mean,?neither more nor
less." CARROLL, THROUGH THE LOOKING-GLASS.
"110 CONG. REC. 18443 (1964).
" 112 CONG. REC. 4192 (1966).
"Hearings 591.
ment to the military appropriation bill, to
provide that the "Joint resolution to
promote the maintenance of international
peace and security in southeast Asia' * *
is hereby repealed"."
To avoid any question as to the effect and
meaning of a vote on his amendment, Sen-
ator MORSE himself declared that it "would
be a vote to make clear to the President
that those who vote for the amendment dis-
approve of the continuation of the exercise
of the power he has been exercising under
the Tenkin Bay resolution"." Senator Rus-
SELL said "that the defeat of the proposal of
the Senator from Oregon by the Members
of the Senate . . will leave the original
joint resolution . . . unimpaired, in full
strength and vigor, and with Congress, ex-
cept for two Members of the Senate who
voted against the 1964 resolution, solemnly
and solidly behind the President in the steps
that he has taken in southeast Asia"."
After full debate, Senator MANSFIELD of
Montana, the majority leader, moved to table
Senator MORSE'S amendment, and the mo-
tion was carried, 92 to 5.0 After some fur-
ther discussion, Senator RUSSELL moved for
passage of the appropriation bill, and his
motion carried by a vote of 93 to 2."
One of the best means available to the
Congress for the control of executive action
is through the power of the purse?the ulti-
mate necessity of Congressional action for
appropriations to provide funds to carry
out executive functions. As stated by Sen-
ator MORSE during the hearings on the mili-
tary appropriation bill, "a vote on this pend-
ing piece of business in the Senate really
is a vote as to whether or not we are going
to continue to support this program, be-
cause the only check, one of the best checks
we have, is to say we are not going to finance
it"." As stated, the bill was passed in the
Senate by a vote of 93 to 2. The vote in
House was 392 to 4.?D
The legal authority of the President of
the United States to conduct the present war,
for "the maintenance of international peace
and security in Southeast Asia", which, as
the Congress declared in its 1964 resolution,
"the United States regards as vital to its
national interest and to world peace", is
surely sustained amply by the composite im-
pact of that resolution, the terms of the
SEATO Treaty ratified by the Senate and the
appropriations made by the Congress to sup-
port the military actions in the treaty area.
That the memorandum of the Lawyers
Committee on American policy Towards Viet-
"112 CONG. REC. 4192 (1966).
" Id. at 4217.
"Id. at 4192.
"Id. at 4228.
" Id. at 4233. Only Senators MORSE and
GRUENING voted against the appropriation. It
was announced that five Senators, necessarily
absent, would each have voted "yea"; so that
a full vote would have been 98 to 2. Id. at
4232.
58 Hearings 593. On May 4, 1965, President
Johnson had requested "the Congress to ap-
propriate, at the earliest possible moment, an
additional $700 million to meet mounting
military requirements in Vietnam". He ex-
plained, in his message to the Congress, that
"this is not a routine appropriation. For
each Member of Congress who supports this
request is also voting to persist in our effort
to halt Communist aggression in South Viet-
nam. Each is saying that the Congress and
the President stand united before the world
in joint determination that the independ-
ence of South Vietnam shall be preserved and
Communist attack will not succeed." KR.
Doc. No, 157, 89th Cong., 1st Sess. (1965).
The appropriation bill (79 Stat. 109) was
passed in the Senate, 88 to 3, and in the
House, 408 to 7. 111 CONG. REC. 9210, 9435
(1965).
"112 CoNe. REC. 4297-4298 (1966).
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
May 17, 1916
10266 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE
natal is grounded on an emotional attitude
opposed to United States policy, rather than
on law, is not only demonstrated by a look
at the facts, but is emphasized by the memo-
randum's concluding paragraph:
"Should we not, twenty years after Presi-
dsrit Roosevelt's hopeful dream?twenty
years after the advent ef the nuclear age with
Use awesome Potentiality of incineration of
our planet and the annihilation of our MAE-
vation and the culture of millenia?Should
we not, 'spell the end of the system of uni-
lateral action . that has been tried for
eenturies?and has always failed'?" 00
Centrasted with the tone and substance of
that memorandum is the temperate state-
ment of thirty-one professors of international
law from leading law schools throughout the
United States, which recites simply that they
"wish to affirm that the presence of US. forces
its South Vietnam at the request of the Gov-
ernment of that country is lawful under gen-
eral principles of international law and the
tented Nations Charter. The engagement of
HS. forces in hostilities at the request of the
Government of South Vietnam is a legiti-
mate use of force in defense of South Viet-
nam against aggression." 00
Contrasted also with the tone and temper
of the memorandum of the Lawyers Commit-
tee on American Policy Towards Vietnam is
the simple resolution adopted unanimously
on February 21. 1966, by the House of Dele-
gates of the American Bar Association on the
joint rerommendation of its Standing Com-
mittee on Peaae and Law Through United
Nations and Ita Section of International and
. Comparative Law." The resolution is sup-
ported by a brief report, which concludes
-that the position of the United States in
Vietnam is legal under interentional law, and
is in accordance with the Charter of the
United Nations and the South-East Asia
? I 'res ty"."
These corn:he:ions as to the legality of the
presence of the United States forces in Viet-
nam under the Constitution of the United
States, as a question of domestic law, are
those of the author. They were not included
in the opinion of the thirty-one professors
of international law or in the resolution of
the American Bar Association.
WEATHER MODIFICATION?S. 2916
Mr. MAGNUSON. Mr. President, the
Executive Office of the President has
just released the Interdepartmental
Committee for Atmospheric Sciences Re-
port No. 10. TCAS continually reviews
the state of. the atmospheric sciences
programs and makes recommendations.
The Committee on Commerce has been
studying the subject of weather modifi-
cation for several months. A Library of
Congress report on weather modification
was recently issued by the committee.
Last week I introduced an amended ver-
sion of S. 2916 to establish a weather
modification program. I expect agency
comment on this amended bill in the
near future. The committee will then
be in a position to report a bill.
So that all will be aware of the ICAS
position, I ask unanimous consent that
the weather modification recommenda-
tions from IC AS Report No. 10 be printed
in the REcoim.
'there being no objection, the excerpt
from the report, was ordered to be
printed in the iii,ECOan, as follows:
,011rarings, Appendix 713.
01 112 Come Rep. A-410 (1966).
.52 AJ1AJ. 392 (1966).
ei 112 Coerc, HBB. 4853-4854 (1966).
WEATHER MODIFICATION
A year ago ICAS recommended that
(a) a well planned, intensive investigation
of the physical processes of or orographic
precipitation should be undertaken, (b) the
Weather Bureau Should conduct research
and if feasible carry on practical work in
weather modification, (e) new programs
should in no way impair the continued
growth of the programs of basic and back-
ground research in weather modification pri-
marily under the aegis of the National
Science Foundation, and (d) NSF sho-uld de-
velop a comprehensive- national plan for
weather modification. Additional specific
recommendations for NSF and FAA planning
action (without budgetary innilications)
were made initiating the development of na-
tional plans for research in hail sienpression
and fog dispersal.
These recommendations have been re-
flected in the current budget proposals for
the weather modification programs of (a)
the Department of the Interior (Bureau of
Reclamation) FY 1967--$3.20 million and
FY 1966?$2.98 million, b) the Department
of Commerce (Environmental Science Serv-
ices Administration?ESSA) FY 1967-81.55
million up from FY 1966-8.65 million, and
(c) the National Science Founeation FY
1967--$3.6 million up from FY 1966-42.4
million. Hail suppression and fog dispersal
plans are in the making. These program
levels are considered as minimal, recogniZ.-
ing that Federal programs in this area are
undergoing critical re-evaluation as the re-
sult of two potentially monumemel doeu-
men tat
The report of the National Academy of
Sciences?National Research Connell, Publi-
cation No. 1350, Weather and Climate Mod-
ifications?Problems and Prospects and the
report of the Special Commission on Weath-
er Modification of the National Science
Foundation, Weather and Climate Modifica-
tions, NSF No. 66-3 have just been com-
pleted and made available for study. These
reports will be considered carefully lay each
interested agency and by CCAS, to determine
their effect upon the national program.
-.....011?11M112131111M?1?1???
WABASH VALLEY ASSOCIA TION
VISITS. WASHINGTON
Mr. HARTKE. Mr.. President, last
week 150 members of the Wabash Valley
Association front Indiana and Illinois
came to Washington to testify before
both the House and Senate Subcommit-
tees on Public Works A.:mropriations.
These people made the long trip to
show the Congress and the Army Corps
of Engineers their intense interest in
flood control, conservation of natural re-
sources and recreation facilities. We
asked the committees to approve appro-
priations of $45 million, which the Bu-
reau of the Budget recommends and an
additional $425,000. These additional
funds are within the Army Corps of En-
gineers capability.
The amount includes: $150,000 for
precon.struction planning on the Big
Pine Reservoir; $100,000 on the Clifty
Creek Reservoir, $125,00 for Patoka
Reservoir; and $25,090 for the Lf.fayette
Reservoir.
In addition testimony the Wabash
Valley Association melabers discussed
pollution control, the small watershed
program, Interior Department programs
and the work of the Army Corps of
Engineers.
I ask unanimous consent to imert the
following reports by the Army Corps of
Engineers: The Wabash Valley Interim
Report No. 3, the Wabash Navigation
Study, availability of water above In-
dianapolis, and a report on the joint
land acquisition policy.
There being no objection, the reports
were ordered to be printed in the REcoer,
as follows:
WABASH BAWER BASIN INTERIM Re roar
NUMBER 3
(For meeting with Senator HART na on
April 29, 1966)
1. Problems and Solutions. The objective
of the Wabash River Basin investigations it
the formulation of plans to provide the beat
'use, or combination of uses, of aaater and
related land resources to meet all foreseeable
short and long-term needs. The resulting
plans of development will include projects
and programs that are the responsibilities
local governments as well as the Federal
Government. Project developmern, studies
consider flood control, water supply, water
quality control, recreation, generation of
hydro-electric power, navigation, fish and
wildlife conservation, upstream w; ter con-
trol, drainage nod irrigation and allied pur-
poses. Extensive and recurrent flood damage-
is a major problem in relation to water re-
sources throughout the basin. The problem
affects urban and -agricultural to eits and
exists generally along the entire length of
the main stems of the Wabash and White
Rivers and along the greater portions of
nearly all their tributaries, although much
has been accomplished and more t; under-
way for the allevitaion of flood damages by
reservoirs, levees, headwalls and channel
im nrovements.
Demands for municipal and Industrial
water supplies have been steadily it creasing
throughout the basin. Preliminary informa-
tion indicates present need for water quality
Improvement of several streams in the basin,
particularly White River at Indianapolis.
There are also some local pollution prob-
lems from mine wastes, drainage, domestic
sewage and industrial wastes. Prettninary
projections of coal mining and thermal
power generation in the basin indie de pos-
sibility of a very large future need for in-
creased water supply to offset acid mine
wastes and to provide for condenser cooling
water.
The existing public demand for recrea-
tional water areas in the basin is; insistent
and growing and will be given full coasidera-
Hon. The basin is almost entirely devoid
of water-based recreation facilities at present
except for a few reservoirs which a 'e com-
pleted or under construction. The conserva-
tion and enhancement of fish and wallife re-
sources is being considered at all projects.
In addition, other uses such as navigation,
power, and others already discussed will he
studied in accordance with present :Ind fu-
ture needs and project potentialities Local
citizens have expressed great intorest in
navigation development of the Wabash.
2. Progress on Interim Report Nu. ober a.
Screening of about 140 reservoir sites iesulted
in completion of preliminary studies of a
number of potential reservoirs including four
sites in the East Fork White River neon, Big
Blue. Downeyville, Deputy, and M !port;
eight sites in the West Fork While River
Basin, Parker City, Perkinsville, Big Walnut,
Killbuck, Frankton, Fortville, Richland, and
Spencer; and four sites in the Little Wabash
River Basin Louisville, Helm, Effingham, and
Wilcox Bridge. Five reservoirs and m e local
flood protection project 'were selected ler sur-
vey scope studies in the third interim re-
port.
The five proposed reservoir projects -ire Big
Blue on Blue River; Downeyville on Flat Rock
River; big Walnut on Big Walnut Creek, all in
Indiana; and Louisville Reservoir on Little
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
A2664 Approved FoCaNGSES23101016129MAIRIDP67/130BRIORE100110070009-aray 17, 1966
If he believed himself to be in the
right, nothing could move him or shake
his judgment, but he arrived at his con-
clusions only after much study and
thought.
Arguments?
He once said:
are only honest misunderstandings. Any
time you sit down and calmly consider all
the facts, the solution can be easily dis-
cerned.
Everyone who knew him agreed that
he was genial, had an engaging personal-
ity, a keen sense of humor, and a very
active mind. He declined to be labeled a
liberal, perhaps because with his wide ex-
perience in life he thought that no label
was appropriate. In refusing to be called
a liberal, he said that he was propeople,
which amounts to about the same thing.
He was a great man, a great Senator,
a friend of the humble and a friend of
the great. We mourn his loss and extend
our deepest sympathies to the grieving
members of his family, whose pride in
him must be even deeper than their grief.
The Call of Duty
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. JOSEPH G. MINISH
OF NEW JERSEY
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, May 17, 1966
Mr. MINISH. Mr. Speaker, in its May
5, 1966, issue, the Advocate, the esteemed
publication of the archdiocese of Newark,
N.J., and diocese of Paterson, carried a
timely and thoughtful editorial on the
military draft. "The Call of Duty,"
which I am pleased to submit for the
consideration of our colleagues, empha-
sizes the duty of citizens to serve their
country. All of us must be distressed
at the dangers and hardships facing our
young men called to military service and
must deeply regret the hard course that
our Nation is compelled to follow. How-
ever, so long as the world is in its present
troubled state, there is no alternative to
the draft.
Our concern must be to insure that it
Is as fair and equitable as is humanly
possible, and constructive criticism of
draft policy and procedures deserves
careful examination. But, despite its de-
fects and flaws, the fact remains that, as
the editorial stresses:
The draft call is the legitimate clarion of
our country for service in our Armed Forces.
The editorial follows in full:
THE CALL OF DUTY
The law of the United States government
is that men may be called in the draft to
serve their country. It is the responsibility
of the federal government to provide for the
defense of the United States. A necessary
element in that defense is the operation of
a draft call. The draft has been part of our
national history. Over the years it has been
necessary for our government to meet na-
tional emergencies by draft calls to provide
for our security.
In the operation of the draft, our govern-
ment has recognized legitimate exemptions.
Our courts have recognized the role of con-
scientious objectors and have granted them
military exemption. However, even in that
area, men have responded to the draft as
medical aides.
Critics who protest the draft point to in-
iquities in its operation, dispute the policy
of our government and raise personal obsta-
cles to its application. Perhaps never before
has there been so much criticism and violent
protestations about the draft as now. We
are told that those eligible for the draft are
not using legitimate excuses to avoid the
draft but find every means to avoid respond-
ing.
The uproar over Vietnam, whether or not
we should be there, the dangers of escala-
tion, the possibility of nuclear warfare?all
of these seem to some Americans to justify
destructive criticism of the draft. This is
not common to the average patriotic Amer-
ican. There must be a realization that every
American has a patriotic duty to serve his
country when his country needs him by
responding to the draft.
It has been well observed that the measure
of patriotism is found in the service and
sacrifice that one makes for his country.
Those who have given service in our Armed
Forces in the many wars of the past have
brought back with them into their lives and
homes a greater love for their country and
the desire to keep America free and strong.
The draft call is the legitimate clarion of
our country for service in our Armed Forces.
To serve is to fulfill our duty as a citizen.
Provide for Popular Election of Governor
of Guam
SPEECH
OF
HON. N. NEIMAN CRALEY, JR.
OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, May 16, 1966
Mr. ASPINALL. Mr. Speaker, I yield
2 minutes to the gentleman from Penn-
sylvania [Mr. CRALEY], also an able
member of the Committee on Interior
and Insular Affairs.
(Mr. CRALEY asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. CRALEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in
support of the bill, HR. 11775.
I wish to congratulate and commend
the gentleman from New York [Mr.
O'BRIEN], chairman of the subcommittee,
and the gentleman from Colorado [Mr.
ASPINALL] , chairman of the full commit-
tee, and the gentleman from Pennsyl-
vania [Mr. SAYLOR], the ranking minor-
ity member, for bringing this legislation
to the floor.
But further and beyond that, Mr.
Speaker, I wish to congratulate the citi-
zens of Guam themselves on the ability
and loyalty they have shown to our de-
mocracy and to the principles of our de-
mocracy. I am sure it is their efforts
and their loyalty to our country that has
brought this legislation to this point and
to its enactment,
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance
of my time.
An Election in Vietnam Poses Many
Difficulties
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
HON. ROBERT W. KASTENMEIER
OF WISCONSIN
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, May 17, 1966
Mr. KASTENMEIER. Mr. Speaker, I
would like to call to the attention of my
colleagues an editorial which recently
appeared in the May 11 Milwaukee
Journal. The Journal addresses itself to
an analysis of the political climate M
South Vietnam. With free elections, a
coalition government may emerge and,
hopefully, bring about a peaceful settle-
ment in South Vietnam, something the
military campaign has, thus far, failed
to accomplish.
The possibility for carrying out a dem-
ocratic election and establishing a rep-
resentative government, however, ap-
pears cloudy. The statements of Gen-
eral Ky cast a shadow over the prospects
of a general election and leave in doubt
the future of any elected civilian gov-
ernment.
South Vietnam, if she is to emerge
from her chaotic state, has to stabilize
her political life. General Ky's utter-
ances, about the future course that the
elected government should follow, only
serve, however, to intensify the civil
strife which is so prevalent in the areas
controlled by the South Vietnamese Gov-
ernment.
The editorial follows:
AN ELECTION IN VIETNAM POSES MANY
DIFFICULTIES
If it is ever held, it will be a strange elec-
tion in South Vietnam. It is scheduled for
mid-August or September or October, de-
pending upon when Premier Ky talks about
it. The election would select an assembly
to write a constitution which would create
a legislature to be voted upon in another
election. The legislature would then choose
a government. In the meantime, Ky says,
he would continue to serve. And if the
government finally named is unsatisfactory
to him, Ky says he will fight it. Ky censored
his statements and wouldn't let Vietnamese
papers print them.
All this, of course, has stirred up the Bud-
dhists, and further confused an already
chaotic situation. Secretary of State Rusk
has said?more hopefully than realistically,
apparently?that Ky never said that he
would remain in power for another year.
News reporters, who heard Ky and saw him,
say that he not only announced his inten-
tion to remain in power but did it dramati-
cally. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch said that
he held forth in a bright yellow flying suit,
"swigging bourbon whisky out of a paper
cup"?it was "like a scene from Batman."
And to underline it all, Ky said again Wed-
nesday that he will be in power at least a
year.
Our government says it favors an election.
The difficulties an election poses, however,
are tremendous. The Vietcong control great
areas of South Vietnam. Will the people in
those areas vote? How can they, and if they
did, could anyone be sure the election was
honest? Presumably the various political
factions?Buddhists, Catholics and what
have you?will support slates of their own
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
May 17, 1960 Approved AA
EtorNMIDIFfiffiCiNIV6IVE9d5cM-PIDAFIWAr3F?00400070009-2
Clubs of America. Therefore, the Commu-
nist influence is cleverly injected into civil
disubedience and reprisals against our eeo-
manic, political, and social system."
Soma will scoff "at the significance of these
student flareups," writes Hoover. "But let
us mitice no mistake: the Communist Party
does not consider them insignificant. The
participants of the New Left are part of the
00,0e0 'state-at-mind' members Gus Hall,
ithe party's general secretary, refers to when
he talks of party strength, He recently
stated the party is experiencing the greatest
opeurge ?In its history."
"Thus the Communists' intentions are
abundantly clear," Hoover continues. "We
have already seen the effects of some of their
stepped-tip activities, and I firmly believe
vest majority of the American public is
disgusted and sickened by such social orgies.
one recourse is to support and encourage the
millions of youth who refuse to swallow the
Communist bait. Another is to let it be
known far and wide that we do not intend
to stand idly by and let demagogues make
a. mockery of our laws and demolish the
foundation of our Republic."
As Mr. Hoover has explained, the "New
I eit" adherents on the campus are a decided
minority. The Communists, however, do not
by any raeans require a majority to accom-
plish their purposes. It was not true in
Russia when they seized power. It was not
true on she University of California campus
:it Berkeley. When a determined, disciplined
minority is ready, it can seize control out of
the chaos and confusion which it deliberately
creates to give it that opportunity.
II.R. 14846
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. JAMES H. (JIMMY) QUILLEN
OF TENNESSEE
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESE:NTATIVES
Tuesday, May 17, 1966
Mr. QUILLEN. Mr. Speaker, I am
inserting in the RECORD another editorial
From a newspaper in my district, the
Kingsport Times of May 11, 1956, which
expresses support of my bill, HR. 14846,
to prohibit the desecration of the flag.
From the Kingsport (Tenn.) Times, May 11,
19661
Dessunso THE FLAG
There stands north of Arlington National
Cemetery a bronze statue which is one of
the most popular tourist attractions in the
nation's capital.
The figures depict the historic raising of
the Stars and Stripes on Iwo Jima during
World War II. However, it also represents
the thousands of Americans who have died
defending this flag.
It is bard for loyal citizens of this nation
to stomach the abuse and disgrace that
eome would-be Americans have heaped upon
th is ban ner.
It has been burned, spat upon, torn up,
defouled and made the object of ridicule by
tleete unpatriotic characters. Yet, they run
to it for protection when they claim their
"rights" are being violated.
It is for these reasons we heartily en-
dorse a bill that has been introduced in
Congress aimed at punishing those who dese-
crate our flag.
The measure, which Congressman JIMMY
QUILLEN is co-sponsoring, provides that any-
one who "publicly mutilates, defaces, defiles,
tramples upon or casts contempt, either by
word or act, upon any flag, standard, colors,
or ensign of the United States" shall be pun-
ished by imprisonment and a stiff nne.
This is a bill that every congressman and
senator can and should support. Those who
do not should have to answer to their con-
stituents back home at election time.
Of course a great many people do not show
the proper respect for the flag. Men will
stand with then heads covered as it passes
by and women will fail to recognize it by
placing their hands over their heart in se lute.
Expropriation of American-Owned
Property in Venezuela
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. EDNA F. KELLY
OF NEW YORK
IN THE HOUSE OF REPREEiENTATEV ES
Tuesday, May 17, 1906
Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, it is with
deep regret that I find it necessary to
have printed in the CONGRESSIONAL REC-
?RR the following letter relating to the
problem of the seizure of American prop-
erty by the Government of Venezuela.
Citizens of my congressional district are
involved and have sought restitution in
the courts of the United States and as-
sistance from the Department of State.
'These seem wanting?and I fail to un-
derstand why help cannot be given to
the Venezuelan Sulphur Corp. which is a
subsidiary of Chemical Natural Re--
sources, Inc., of New York City.
CHEMICAL NATURAL RESOURCES, INC.,
Nem York, N.Y., Man 2, 1966.
ha the expropriation and confiscation by the
Government of Venezuela of the proper-
ties of citizens residing in 26 States of
the United States.
Hon, EDNA F. KELLY,
House 011iee
Washington, D. C.
My DEAR CONGRESSWOMAN KELLY: Your at-
tention is respectfully called to the above
subject so that in the event Venezuela should
again wish to be considered for aid of any
type from. the United States taxpayers it
should be denied it.
Venezuela, disregarding international law,
which holds that properties of foreigu na-
tionals should not be expropriated without
prompt and adequate compensation, expro-
priated, confiscated, and wantonly vandalized
properties in Venezuela owned by inves-
tors from these 20 states. Every means to
arrive at an equitable settlement was ex-
hausted during negotiations in Caracas from
1959 to 1962. After that, suit was instli uted
In the United States. Venezuela pleaded sov-
ereign immunity as its defense and thus: pre-
vented the real issues to be heard. This has
been in the courts during the years 1963,
1964, 1965, and 1966. The United States Su-
preme Court is expected to review this
matter. The Department of :State has sup-
ported Venezuela from the inception of :shese
grievous illegalities.
Dr. R. Lepervanche Parpareen one of Vene-
zuela's leading and most highly respected
lawyers, and former President of the OAS,
and one of the few, who can still speak out
in Venezuela, recently publicly stated in
Caracas?We who were born in Venezuela?
We who who have lived in Venezuela all our
lives?We who are subject to the laws of
Venezuela??know there i.13 no justice to be
obtained in our courts in Venezuela. If this
is the treatment given to the natives of Vene-
zuela, what treatment could be expected for
A2G63
Americans in those same courts. Never ,he-
less, the Department of State still recom-
mends that this matter be returned to those
Venezuelan courts.
Presently, the sons of some of these robbed
Investors are in Vietnam fighting to protect
the properties of the South Vietnamese, while
the confiscation of their own properties by
the delinquent government of Venezuela is
defended and condoned by their own govern-
ment.
During these delaying legal maneuvers
Venezuela has obtained hundreds of millions
in aid, increased sugar quotas, increased oil
quotas and investment guarantees, all at
the expense of American taxpayers. -Until
Venezuela makes redress to these investors
from 26 States of the United States, Vene-
zuela should receive nothing from the United
States, including investment guarantees for
projects in Venezuela.
Thanks for any efforts in their behalf and
best regards.
Sincerely,
BENJAMIN S. Down, President.
The Late Honorable Patrick V. Mc-
Namara, U.S. Senator From Michigan
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. JOHN C. MACKIE
OF MICHIGAN
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, May 17, 1966
Mr. MACKIE. Mr. Speaker, the
caption of an obituary article in a Wash-
ington newspaper announced the sad
news of the passing of Senator Patrick
Vincent McNamara of Michigan by re-
ferring to him as a "friend of labor and
the aged." That was perhaps his finest
epitaph. But he was a friend not only
of laboring men and women and of aged
men and women. His friends were
numbered in the thousands, and they
came from every walk of life. I am
proud to have been one of them, and to
have served in the Michigan congres-
sional delegation with him.
In 1921, at the age of 27, he came to
Detroit to head a construction crew. He
soon left his pipefitting trade to enter
the management side of the construction
business, but his active interest in the
problems of organized labor never waned
throughout his long life. Discussing his
lifelong association with the labor move-
ment, he once said:
My vocation has been the construction
Industry, but my avocation has been the
labor movement. I have never held a said
labor office.
He was known best for his stanch sup-
port of Federal aid to education, medical
care for the aged, and similar progres-
sive measures. He played a leading role
in the struggle to pass the medicare bill
for hospital insurance for the aged under
the social security system. He was
named chairman of the important Senate
Public Works Committee in 1963, and
was also the chairman of the same Com-
mittee's Flood Control-Rivers and Har-
bors Subcommittee. He was the success-
ful floor manager of a minimum wage bill
that raised the minimum wage to $1.25
an hour.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
ray 17, 1966Approvedt
m RDnatnifiko00400070009-2 A2665
for the constitutional asSembly. If one side
wins overwhelmingly will the others stand
still for it? If the assembly is split will it
be able to draft a constitution? If the
threat of resistance by Sy and others hangs
over it all, is the whole business feasible?
If the election did result in a civilian gov-
ernment that no one immediately tried to
overthrow, what would the change be in
the status of the war? None in all proba-
bility.
The big need in Vietnam is to stop the
killing, put an end to the agony the nation
is undergoing and step back from the risk
of involving the United States in a wider
war.
Solution to the Problems of Mass
Transportation
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. EDNA F. KELLY
OF NEW YORE
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, May 17, 1966
Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, I whole-
heartedly support the provisions of S.
2935, a bill to authorize Federal grants to
encourage regional solutions to transpor-
tation problems and to authorize grants
under the Mass Transportation Act of
1964.
It is axiomatic that our commuter
services are in dire straits, and that those
commuter and passenger services are
vital to the life of our urban communi-
ties and, indeed, vital to the life of the
entire country. Without those services
being available, our cities would be stran-
gled in a huge congestion of automotive
traffic and the economic and social life of
the country would be seriously impaired.
Our Federal Government through the
years has stepped in to render assistance
where the vital interests of the country
are at stake. There is indeed a clear
need for Federal assistance at this point.
We must prevent the further closing
down of these vital services and we must
take forward-looking steps to achieve
improvement and rationalization of
transportation into, in and between our
urban communities.
The provision in S. 2935 authorizing
Federal grants to meet one-half of the
annual net operating deficit of any mass
transportation company serving urban
areas is such a far-reaching step. If
commuter operations and if urban trans-
portation services were to be seriously
curtailed, the impact on the economy of
any urban area would be self-evident.
I would suggest, however, that the
committee give serious consideration to
the proposal that the bill be amended so
as to permit the making of such grants
not only to transportation companies,
but also to authorities and systems which
are operated by the municipalities or by
the States. Whether such systems are
operated by private companies or by mu-
nicipal or State authorities, the require-
ments and the desired ends are identical.
I would strongly urge that the committee
eliminate this unnatural distinction and
that the bill be broadened so as to direct
Federal help where help is needed, rather
than on some artificial basis.
My support of this bill does not arise
solely from my concern for my own city.
Every major urban area in the United
States will sooner or later experience
the same type of problems which are now
being faced in the East. Indeed, many
areas are already experiencing those
problems. It is imperative that we give
assistance to that one area in the trans-
portation field where the Government
has not been forthcoming with active
support. The Government subsidizes the
airlines and steamship companies. It
provides unbelievable quantities of funds
for the highway program. Commuter
services, however, have received no such
support and this failure of support has
resulted in the deplorable conditions
currently being faced by our urban com-
munities.
I strongly urge favorable committee
action on S. 2935.
Standpoint?Prayers in the School
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. EDWARD J. DERWINSKI
OF ILLINOIS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, May 17, 1966
Mr. DERWINSKI. Mr. Speaker, once
the distinguished minority leader, of the
other body, Illinois Senator EVERETT
DIXICSEN, returns to the Senate floor, his
amendment for the purpose of guaran-
teeing schoolchildren the right to pray
in classrooms if they wish will be de-
bated in the Senate. It is my hope that
the other body will act favorably on this
constitutional amendment, and I am
most hopeful that we in the House will
do likewise. Support of this amendment
has come from across the country.
Typical of the editorial comment was
that carried by WBBM?TV, of Chicago,
in its editorial broadcast Tuesday, May
10.
STANDPOINT-PRAYERS IN THE SCHOOL
In all of the nearly two centuries it has
existed, the Constitution of the United
States has been amended only twenty-four
The first eight amendments make up the
Bill of Rights, which guarantee us our civil
liberties. Others deal with such weighty
matters as rights to vote, the makeup of our
Congress, prohibition and the amendment
which later repealed it, the income tax and
the procedures for electing our leaders.
Now it is proposed that we amend the Con-
stitution one more time. The purpose would
be to guarantee school children the right to
pray in their classrooms if they want to. It
may sound like a small point, perhaps even
frivolous, compared to the more ponderous
matters dealt with in other constitutional
amendments.
But we support the proposed prayer
amendment, if only to clear up a confused
muddle which has set neighbor against
neighbor, religion against religion and com-
munity against community clear across the
nation.
Senator EVERETT DIRKSEN, of Illinois, along
with 43 other Senators have sponsored a
Senate Joint Resolution calling for the
amendment. It is a rather simply worded
document. It merely provides that no one
in authority can either prevent or require
any person to participate in prayer in a pub-
lie building, nor can any one in authority tell
any one what to pray.
The prayer issue has erupted several times
in the Chicago area, as well as elsewhere.
There is, in fact, a federal court case pending
here now arising from the prayer issue in a
school in nearby DeKalb.
We think the Dirksen prayer amendment
would put an end to such disputes. We also
hope it will put an end to the endless argu-
ments over-separation of church and state,
and just what that issue entails.
There have been hints, for example, that a
suit might one day be filed requiring all
United States coins to be re-issued because
the present ones carry the legend "In God We
Trust."
Some have even suggested that it may be
unconstitutional for a President of the
United States, or any other public officer, to
take the oath of office with his hand placed
upon a Bible.
Three court decisions, two by the Supreme
Court and one by a U.S. Court of Appeals,
have virtually banished prayer from schools
In this country.
But the decisions also have served to con-
fuse the whole country on the knotty prob-
lem of the relationships between church and
state. The net result has been to breed in-
tolerance and to create bickering among
friends and neighbors who adhere to differ-
ing religions.
We believe the Dirksen amendment would
clear the air, by simply stating that children
have the right to pray in their classrooms if
they want to, and don't have to pray if they
don't want to.
A Tribute to Secretaries
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. JOHN R. SCHMIDHAUSER
OF IOWA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, May 16, 1966
Mr. SCHMIDHAUSER. Mr. Speaker,
It is a distinct privilege and pleasure
for me to join with my colleagues in pay-
ing tribute to the dedicated secretaries
In observance of National Secretaries
Week.
Today, I would like to pay tribute to
those many loyal men and women who,
in their dedicated careers as secretaries,
give each of us in public life such capable
and understanding guidance in our daily
efforts to serve our constituents in the
U.S. Congress.
I also would like to pay tribute to all
of the secretaries in private business and
in industry. I especially want to point
with pride to the secretary on Capitol
Hill, who plays such a vital role in serv-
ing our country and who is well trained
and qualified to help keep the wheels of
our economy running smoothly.
May I also take this opportunity to
compliment and commend the work of
the Official Reporters of Debate. This is
such a demanding job, and a task that
often requires a certain skill to take the
dictation that is so rapidly spoken on the
House floor, and when transcribed flows
Into such eloquent remarks.
My wholehearted thanks go out to my
entire staff, who serve me faithfully in
discharging my duties to the people of
southeast Iowa.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29: CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
A2666 Approved Fore:04mM~ ERMA
The Draft: Educational Status Has Noth-
ing To Do With Duty To Fight
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
HON. ARCH A. MOORE, JR.
OF WEST VIRGINIA
IN TEE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, May 17, 1966
Mr. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, one of the
most controversial subjects during this
war and every other war in our history
is the system for drafting our young men
into militay service.
The Wheeling, W. Va., Intelligence'',
which was founded before West Virginia
became a State, has a constructive,
straightforward editorial on . 'The
Draft." What; the newspaper proposes
is a requirement that every man within
the miLtary age bracket; be put on pre-
cisely the same draft footing. The news-
paper backs this proposal un with some
strong, logical reasons. I have unani-
tnou.s consent that the editorial he re-
printed in its entirety:
'Ins DriAnir: EDUCATIONAL STATUS HAS
1,10"IliING 'Co Do WITH DUTY To EIGHT
Student demonstrations against the draft
exanunations are understandable ror the.
reason that no war is popular with those.
who have to tight it, and that this particu-
lar engagement has less patriotic appeal
than most, But those who attend college
and who may feel that the examination put
them at a disadvantage in relation to other
college, men have much less cause for com-
plaint than young men in the same age
bracket who are not in college.
There is no way on earth by which these
examinations can be made a fair test of
young man's war service liability for the
anntnat the basic concept is false.
When the Country is at war?whatever
may be thought of the official decisions that
brought us into it?it is the duty of the
peopie to wage it. We have a right to ques-
tion the wisdom of the involvement, to criti-
cize the conduct of the war and the policy of
'which it is a censequence; to control termi-
nation of the war effort. But so long as it
is in progress we the people must support
wi I Is money-and men.
ileeause rat the accident of age, the actual
righting, the risking of life and limb, is a
eespousibility of our young men. This is
unfor innate, but it is a fact of life we can-
riot escape. The being so simple justice, it
iieems to this newspaper, requires that every
taatl within the military age bracket be put
on precisely the same footing. The fact
that one boy is in college while another is
not has nothing whatever to do with it, or
sienna not have. The fact that one lai)y
truly be a brilliant, industrious student, ao-
other a dullard. Or trifler, should have no
hearing on his draft status, if a young
loan chooses to work rather than pursue
calociation; if his economic of social circum-
et:tee/is deny him the opportunity to go to
ruling's; if his mental capabilities are such,
tient a. college carreer is not for him, he does
riot aesume, by any of these circumstances,
ii ohligatiOn to fight and if necessary die
or hie Country that does not rest as heavily
Ii every other young man his age.
No physically and mentally able man in
toe appropriete age bracket whose absence
woulci not impose a hardship on others de-
pendent on hire for their sustenance should
be exempt from the draft.
To the degree, then, that these controver-
eial examinations affect the liability of any
person taking them or ignoring them or
meligible to participate they are unfair.
,:,?
""_671A9WW9p400070009-2may 17, 1966
Private Enterprise: The Initiative of the
American Way of Life
? -
EXTENSION OF REMALKS
OF
HON. G. ELLIOTT HAGAN
OF GEORGIA.
IN THE HOUSE OF RBPRESEN9 ATIVES
Monday, Map 16, 1966
Mr. HAGAN of Georgia. Mr Speaker,
the 71st Annual Convention of the Chil-
dren of American Revolution was held
recently here in Washington.
More than 1,500 people heard an
eighth-grader from Lyons, Ga. , Ralph
Hamilton Lankford, Jr., deliver the win-
ning oration in the CAR national ora-
torical contest. Young Mr. Lankford 's
speech was entitled "Private Enterprise:
The Initiative of the American Way of
Life." I was greatly impressed with the
comments of such a young American,
and I am inserting it in the RECORD with
the thought in mind that my colleagues
will also enjoy it:
PRIVATE ENTERPRISE: THE TNITTATIV OF THE
A 'UERICAN WAY OF 1,IFF.
(Try Ralph Hamilton Lankford, Jr.)
in a mere one hundred sixty ',ears. the
United States of America has grown from
birth to become the greatest ne Lion the
World has ever known. This could only be-
come a reality because of the unique system
in America . . . that system of private
enterprise.
Private Enterprise was the guide deaf took
Daniel 13oone to Kentucky to open a new
territory arid to help Americans settle in this
land. Private Enterprise gave Rockefeller
the insight and the initiative to establish
hig business from a small beginnine.
John Hays Hammond has said, "The, func-
tion of government is not to guarantee
equality of reward nor inequality of service.
All a government can do in this respect, even
a paternal government, is to give equality of
opportunity." These words apply today as
neve, hefine, and it is time for :ill good
Americans to speak op and point to such
tlaou"litsai these and remind our govern-
ment that we are where WE' are todaj, because
of personal initiative. and rot becaui a of gov-
re-nine/at contral, The trend shown today
with rent subsidy and medicare is leading us
01117 too flulelclY to the Chnamunist boast of
taking over the United States of America
by 1973.
We have iiiieeeme too firmly set in tire pat-
tern, of the majority, feeling that a:. long as
we remain in the majority, "George" can
take care or things! If we want to benefit
from the continued practice of privai e enter-
prise, that has made cur nation so erest, we
must begin by practicing reach a theory, by
doing for ourselves, and by shoving the
initiative to take advantage of every oppor-
tunity toward is moire secure tomorrow.
Private enterprise is ours only an lo' g as we
are willing to defend it, praiitice it, at .d bene-
fit from it, Let us stop allowing Uncle Sam
to do for us what we are capable of doing for
ourseivere
Let us compare for a minute ti e com-
munistic approach to production end the
American way of private enterprise. Twice
Americans have come forth with food for the
Russians. First in 1922 and then core re-
cently in 19133. When workers are deprived
of incentive, when wages and living costs
ere provided equally to all, the natural in-
clination of human nature is to do am more
than is necessary to exist. So, during both
these periods mentioned, workers cc tiled to
extend their energies beyond the minimum
effort. As a result, HLISSia. liii Shortages.
In 1922 these shortages were so seeere that
lave million Russians died of starvation.
More recently, in 1963, the cttliu'iei;c3 0'
wheat threatened the communisti with a
similar result. And to the rescue, not mice
but twice, came the products of Private
Enterprise . . . money and food from the
free people of the United States of Amei ica.
H we in America had not been productive,
it would have been impossible to help our
fellow man. Whether the help was a ppreti-
ated or not . . . whether it was to our best
interest or not . . would be subject tor
debate. The point here is that we had the
means by which to help a nation ii) trouble
that had claimed for over forty years that
it was the perfect system of government.
It is our privilege as members of 1,11e
Children of the American Revolution to
defend Private Enterprise for future genera-
tions. How do we go about this task? We
begin by studying history and becoming in-
formed about our system of advancement ...
and let us always remember that Communal)"
is our enemy.
Can we as American Citizens and Children
of the American Revolution praietaiie daily
our system of Private Enterprise iliad eradi-
cate the Communist boast of taking over the
United States of America by 1973?
I am confident we can!!
Parkway Students High in NaConwide
Testing
EXTENSION OF REMAIU'S
OF
HON. EDWARD J. GURNEY
OF FLORIDA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, May 17, 1966
Mr. GURNEY. Mr. Speaker,! ask per-
mission to insert a self-explanatony
newspaper clipping from the Titusville,
Fla., Star-Advocate, a story paying
proper tribute to a fine group of stu-
dents at Parkway Junior High School in
Titusville.
This is but one of the many fine 6choots
in my congressional district. Tb' prin-
cipal, Mr. Ralph E. Robertson and the
guidance director, Mrs. Ruth Cluwning,
have been kind enough to bring this
article to my attention. Quite naturally.
they are very proud of this achievement,
and rightly so, when school dropout is
unfortunately becoming fashionable and
a way of life for so many youngsters
today.
I commend these students for tI td.r ef-
forts.
PARKWAY STUDENTS HIGH IN NATI WM::
TESTING
Ten of 12 Parkway Junior High students
who participated in the National Educational
Development Test, given in March, pl iced in
the upper 10 per cent on national norms, ac-
cording to Principal Ralph Robertson.
Two students, Jim Current and Joh alee, scored scored in the 99th percentile, nationally.
Other students who scored from 92 to )8 per
are Harry Sanders Bell, Jay Car gneiss,
Scott Carpenter. Donna Davidson, Debbi,
Hock, Sarah Kahn, Alice Loudon auir Lyle
Shatter, III.
The test was given to ninth year it dents
only and was given on a voluntary besis.
Most of the students of Parkway scored high-
est in science and math.
The results have all been received in the
guidance office and the students who pertici-
pated should be receiving their scores with-
in the next week.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
May 17, 196ApproveJFbL
Hawaii's 25th Division in Vietnam Pursues
Military Objectives Under Extreme
Climatic Conditions
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. SPARK M. MATSUNAGA
OF HAWAII
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, May 16, 1966
Mr. MATSUNAGA. Mr. Speaker, al-
though I am well aware that "adaptabil-
ity" is a necessary qualification of Amer-
ica's military forces today, I am never-
theless continually impressed by the effi-
cient manner in which our troops are
adapting themselves to both the irregu-
lar tactics of the Vietcong and to the ex-
treme climatic conditions of South Viet-
nam. In a recent news dispatch from
Cu Chi, Vietnam, Reporter Bob Jones
describes how the 25th Infantry Division
from Hawaii is successfully accomplish-
ing its military objectives while also
making careful preparations for the
coming rainy season.
One of the primary military objectives
of the Tropic Lightning Division, head-
quartered at Cu Chi, in the agriculturally
rich and strategically situated Hau
Nghia Province, is "area denial." But
the continued denial to the Vietcong of
this 50-mile by 50-mile Province, which
is their chief food supply source and the
location of some of their main travel
routes, is expected to become increas-
ingly difficult with the arrival of the
rainy season in mid-May.
It is difficult to imagine that this
"dusthole" which has midday tempera-
tures of 103? will during the monsoon
season receive an estimated 74 inches of
rain. The highways leading into the
area are expected to become almost im-
passable.
But the commander of the 25th Divi-
sion, Maj. Gen. Fred C. Weyand, and his
men know that the military objectives
for this important Province must be
achieved, for the Province is bordered on
the northeast by the well-known patch
of jungle called the Iron Triangle, and
on the north by the reputed Vietcong
command headquarters for the entire
country, war zone C. Thus, the men of
the 25th are not only pursuing the enemy
without respite, but are also racing
against time to prepare for the torrential
rains. Foxholes are being replaced by
raised bunkers and pup tents by wood-
and-screen, off-the-ground tent kits.
I submit for inclusion in the CONGRES-
SIONAL RECORD the account by Reporter
Bob Jones which appeared in the April 21
issue of the Honolulu Advertiser:
"AREA DENIAL" 25TH'S AIM
(By Bob Jones)
Cu Cur, VIETNAM?Signs began popping up
around the Hau Nghia province countryside,
erected by Viet Cong who face an increas-
ingly difficult existence:
"National Liberation Front Country. Keep
out. Anyone advancing beyond this point
will be killed."
Maj. Gen. Fred C. Weyand, commander of
the 25th Infantry Division, immediately
ordered the signs tarn down and new ones
AIRMIPHR6IIINFITY{I Rffi3K
0400070009-2
put up in their place: "25th Division terri-
tory. Viet Gong will be killed."
In a series of operations named for their
Hawaii links (Honolulu, Taro Leaf, Kahuku,
Makaha, Kahala, Kaneohe and Kaena),
Weyand's troops for nearly three months
have been chasing the Viet Cong from the
treacherous Ho Bo Woods north of the
province to the Oriental (Vaico) River in
the south.
The number of VC killed by body count
(468) was not spectacular, even considering
the additional 971 "possible" kills the Tropic
Lightning troops of the 2nd Brigade logged.
But as Weyand explained: "One of our pri-
mary missions here is area denial. We make
-sure the Viet Cong can't use the territory.
Sometimes Johnny (Col. Lynnwood Johnson,
2nd Brigade commander) sends his troops
back into an area he's already cleared just as
a warning to the Viet Cong not to return
once we've left."
Except for isolated incidents wherein the
V-C set up nighttime road blockades or tax
travelers on Highway 1, the division has
pretty much denied this traditional rice-and-
peanut supply province to large units of
Viet Cong.
"We belong here," said a division major.
"We intend to live and stay here and rid the
province of the Communist influence that's
been here for 20 years. We intend to do it by
aggressive military action and aggressive civic
action."
From an untamed and sniper-infested
island in the middle of a sea of Viet Cong
guerrillas, Cu Chi has grown in three months
into a military enclave which also is the
headquarters for the 25th Division.
Inside tile sprawling compound, which
would encompass an area almost all of
Waialae-Kahala, life is markedly improving
for the soldier not out on line duty.
"The Ambush" laundry has sprung up to
handle dirty uniforms for more than 5,000
men. The pup tents have come down and
been replaced by wood-and-screen tent kits,
some of which sport names such as "Club
Hubba Hubba" or "The Glades." Four sickly
palm trees wave over the division head-
quarters.
But despite the numerous improvements
in living conditions, food and general se-
curity, Cu Chi still remains a dust hole in
which the heat boils up to an unbearable 103
degrees on a sunny April day.
The troops not out fighting are racing
against the calendar to get everything raised
off the ground before the torrential rainy
season begins in mid-May.
The province's rainy season runs until late
November and dumps 74 inches of rain on
the terrain which is as perfectly flat as a
pool table.
Foxholes must be abandoned in favor of
raised bunkers. Tanks and armored per-
sonnel carriers will become useless, and even
the daily convoys which bring all the divi-
sion's supplies up from Saigon will be hard
pressed to negotiate the 30 miles of flooded
highway.
Weyand has his troops pushing the Viet
Cong to the maximum before the rains hit.
Northeast of the 50-mile-wide, 50-mile-
deep province is the famous Iron Triangle, a
patch of heavy forestation that even the
crack U.S. airborne troops haven't been able
to deny to the VC.
To the north is Tay Ninh province and
War Zone C, reputed to be the VC command
center for the whole country.
Eventually, these areas will have to be
cleaned out and the VC dragged out of the
command tunnel complex. The intricacy of
that operation is something most military
men here don't even want to think about.
Hau Nghia province itself is a major task,
and the Vietnamese government hopes to
have the Cu Chi district pacified by May 31.
The province is a main travel route from
easterly War Zone D and the Cambodian
A2659
border for VC supply and replacement units.
Since it produces a wealthy 960 tons of pine-
apple and other fruit and 1,050 tons of pro-
tein-rich peanuts every year, it is a natural
supply area for the VC.
It is one of the few provinces north of
Saigon with a surplus of rice, cattle, pigs
and poultry, also badly needed by underfed
VC armies.
Its Highway 1, an all-weather surfaced
road, runs from Saigon to Cambodia and has
always been open only at the whim of the
VC.
The area where 2nd brigade troops are
- running operations now is where U.S. Agency
for International Development representa-
tive Douglas K. Ramsey was kidnapped by
the VC last year. He still is missing.
Ironically, Ramsey was snatched while rid-
ing alone along Route No. 8, a stretch of road
he had advised in one of his province re-
ports should be traveled only when it is
"lined on both sides with troops."
It's tough fighting, partially because of the
temperatures. Average noon temperature is
90 degrees, which probably wouldn't be so
bad were it not that the evening tempera-
ture drops off only four degrees from that.
The average early morning temperature is
81 degrees.
Results of the Mize Instant Poll on
National Issues
SPEECH
OF
HON. CHESTER L. MIZE
OF KANSAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, May 12, 1966
Mr. MIZE. Mr. Speaker, the results of
the questionnaire which I have circu-
lated in the Second District of Kansas
have been tabulated and I wish to bring
the tabulations to the attention of my
colleagues.
I called this the Mize instant poll be-
cause I visited most o' the counties of the
Second District during the Easter recess
and handed out the questionnaire per-
sonally in every community I visited.
In a great many instances, the questions
on the opinion poll were answered on the
spot and I was able to take them away
with me. I also left additional copies
in each community and mailed copies to
those I did not visit personally, so the
questionnaire did get good coverage in
the district.
The response has been higher than av-
erage, I feel, because of the personal dis-
tribution and the fact that I could also
collect a good many of the completed
questionnaires before I left each commu-
nity. I am pleased that so many of my
constituents participated and I am con-
fident that this cross section of opinion
accurately reflects the position that a
majority of the voters in the district take
on each of these issues.
Under leave to extend my remarks, I
respectfully request that the results of
the Mize instant poll appear in the REC-
ORD at this point. The summary fol-
lows:
THE MIZE INSTANT POLL ON NATIONAL ISSUES
(Results in percent)
1. Should Congress submit to the people a
Constitutional Amendment that would per-
mit one House of State Legislatures to be
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
A2660 CONGRESSION AL RECORD ? A VPENDIX y /, .19 .5G
apportioned on a, basis other than popula-
tion?
Yea _ _ 53
No _ 31
No opinion_ _
3. Do you favor a our-year term ior Con-
gressmen?
Yes-
:do
No opinion_
_ tie
12
3
3. Do you think the benefits f the poverty
program outweigh the reported costs and
abuses?
Yes
OpIlli0/1
BO
5
ehould the minimum wage be raised
frOal its present $1.25 per hour level?
YLT,
No eti
No opinion 4
4-(al If yes, to what level? (Not all of
Uvote who thought the minimum wage
Itlanda be increased indicated a specific rate.
Of those who did, these are the prefer-
ences.)
For if
For :0.60 __ 33
For $1.75 19
(b). Should farm, hotel and restaurant
werkers receive a minimum wage guarantee?
eS _ at
No 41
No opinion 8
a. Do you taeor vetting aside a small per-
eentage of revenue each year to reduce the.
national debt?
Vet; 88
No 9
No opinion
6. Do you think Incomes are increasing in
moportion to the rising cost of living?
Yes 2!)
N o .___ 06
No opiMon 5
7, Do you .favor or oppose the following
courses of itetion which the U.S. might take
iIi Viet Nam?
('1 Withdraw?
Yes_ 12
No
68
'rake wilatever military action is nec-
essary to achieve decisive victory?
Yes 87
tin Keep up our present military effort in
lopes of a negotiated peace?
'Tee !re2
No 48
GI, should be noted that many of the re-
epondents answered more than one part of
the question. Many who voted against with-
1>; wal also voted for one of the other pro-
posals. By far; the greatest number of those
answering this question responded to sec-
Lion "b".)
8. .Do you favor more strict Federal regula-
tion in the sale and ownership of firearms?
17
Ne ._ 50
Ne (minion 3
1. Do you favor increasing Federal control
of the Unemployment Compensation pro-
glean, increasing the duration of the benefits
mai the amount of payments as well as em-
ployer contributions?
Yea 10
.
No opinion_ 3
Mr. Paul-Henri Spaak Discusses 1. The
U.S. Involvement in Vietnam, 2. The
Importance of NATO
EXTENUION REMARKI
HON. J. ARTHUR YOUNGER
or CALIPORNLA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, May 17, 1966
Mr. YOUNGER. Mr. Speaker, Mr.
Paul-Henri Spaak delivered an d dress
iu Brussels on the 20th anniversary of
the Association Belge-Americaine in
which he rather clearly defines the re-
sponsibility of the United States to Viet-
nam and the reasons why we an, there.
This is an excellent commentary from
one of the European governmental lead-
ers. His address follows:
mrc. FAUL-HENRI SPAM< DISCUSSES 1. THE U.S.
INVOLEMENT TN VIET-Navy, 2, THY IMPOR-
TANCE OP NATO
Today, you celebrate Doi twentimb anni-
versary of the Beige-Amer icaine Aseociation
and you are celebrating it, let vs speak
frankly, at a difficult tune for the United
States. Their politics are not well under-
stood, and their actions in Viet-Nam are
highly criticized in many parts of Lae world.
All ,of us here, and I believe rdi in the
United States, have a horror of wise we are
all dismayed by the pictures and :a:counts
of the lighting to which we are sintiected?
I wonder why?night filter night on toe tele-
vision.
However, we are confronted with a politi-
cal 'fact which we must try to explain to
ourselves: and I believe it would he a good
thing to have the members of the Associa-
tion think about this problem as 0early as
possible to try and counter balance the pres-
ent unfavorable opinion.
)arGINS OF THE wan 11.
Tile first question to be raised is "Did
the United. States declare war on Viet Nam?"
Obviously the problem Cf how a war origi-
nated, is always a historical problem which
is difficult to settle. The real causes and
responsible parties of the 1911 NNW r are still
being discussed.
But still a number of facts are incontest-
able. In the years following the 1.981 Geneva
agreements, the United States did not inter-
vene in Viet Nam.
So long as South Viet-Nam Wav living in
peace, the United States was content with
sending a few tens or hundreds ot technical
aides and advisers, in the hope that the
country could by itself assert its independ-
ence and find its political equilithe urn at the
same time. Then io 1960, the North Viet-
Namese C:fmmunist Party declared at a pub-
lic meeting that North Viet--Nam I, main ob-
jective was to conquer South Viet-Nam and
bring it within its orbit and jurisdiction.
That is when events started with the politi-
cal action mentioned earlier.
Gradually North Viet-Nam beg in to send
troops to South Viet-Nam and, relying on
fiolitical opposition which definitely exist-
ed, attempted to seize power, overthrow the
government and realize its aims. It was
then, and only then, teeit the Ui ited States
intervened,
To son ie extent I understand ;he disillu-
sion and bitterness of aorne United States
leaders, who cannot make Eurepeams and
other peoples understand the importance of
the problems which arise down there and
the fairness of the stand they have taken.
And yet there is an argument, which we
must understand and which concerns us.
I have heard Mr. John Foster Dulles use this
argument emphatically in the past, end I
have heard Mr. Dean Rusk repeat it quite
often lately: If the United States dots not
honor a single one of the commitments they
have undertaken around the world, how can
the rest of the world believe that they will
honor other commitments?
Here we are directly involved? If the
United States, who have concluded a treaty
with South Viet-Nam, who have premised
to help them guarantee and defend their
independence and liberty, failed to keep
their word, would we not become a ociona
too, would we not believe that one ri ft, the
United States might look for excuses :lot to
keep promises made to us?
I believe that this argument is vi basic
point of view and that the United States
leaders are right.
If a great nation, which makes eimmit-
ments throughout the world, fails to keep
its word, no one can believe in pledges any
and we are directly concerned.
IMPERIALISM ARRESTED THROUGHOUT THE WORLD
What discourages the leaders of the United
States is that they cannot make Europeans
understand that what is going on in Viet-
Nana is not so different from what happened
in Europe from 1918 to 1950. At the t time,
right or wrong so as not to start hi :torte:al
quarrels, we thought that we were seriously
threatened, and that the Soviet imperialism
then prevailing could result in enuntries
other than those who had already experi-
enced the Soviet yoke and influence could
be subjected against their will to Communist
power.
At that point, we found it very tiatural,
indeed almost all of us rejoiced to sec the
United States come to our aid, to lie:p guar-
antee our national defense, and to ineke with
us more significant and weighty commit-
ments than they had made with Europe
throughout their history.
Is the situation in Asia today really so dif-
ferent? Would anybody dare to maintain
that the free and independent nations of
Asia are not threatened by Chinese imperial-
ism, the imperialism of COMMUTHS'.Chitnit
then why can't we understand that what the
United States has done in Europe, their
might, their influence, the position they oc-
cupy in the world, and the role they muei
play today compels them to take a stand in
Asia, identical to the one taken in Europe.
I don't know why people cannot under-
stand that the Viet-Nam problem is miler
more important than a conflict in which the
independence or slavery of South Viet-Nam
is at stake.
If the Americans were to voluntatily
abut-
don Viet-Nam, why would they mine 111 in ainr
Asian country?
If they abandoned Viet-Nam, way would
they defend Thailand, Malaysia, or to. le Philip-
pines?
And tomorrow, and a very near tomorrow
at that, why would they even defend Asia?
The problem of the American leaders is
not only to win, victory in Viet-I' 150, it is
also to know whether, through an iibancion
which would not be compulsory, they would
accept the idea that all of Asia mu ft be auh -
merged by Chinese and Communist im-
perialism.
We can now realize the signifies tee of tt e
problem which threatens the stability of the
world and?permit me to say it--aid Serefy
you will have understood it alre.ady !roue-
selves, our destiny or at least the destiny
of future generations.
The United States is making a temnendima
effort in Viet-Nam.
But who desires peace today? I am aston-
ished and dumbfounded when I reeeive from
certain organizations requests for signatures
on petitions in which the United States is
asked to make peace in Viet-Nam.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
May 17, 1,66 Approved Foralsektgalali9/tRoffn74514s4pR000400070009-2
This Nation came into possession of
Guam in 1898 as a legacy of the Spanish
American War; we acquired the Virgin
Islands by purchasing them from Den-
mark in 1917.
I would like to point out, however, that
the territory we now refer to as the Dis-
trict of Columbia was acquired by this
Nation from Maryland in 1788 and Vir-
ginia in 1789. As a natural result of the
bloody war we had just fought to achieve
that right, it never occurred to the Fed-
eral Government that the people living
In the new territory would not have
home rule, and indeed, until 1802 the
existing State laws were continued in the
two municipal corporations which then
made up the populated areas of the
territory.
In 1802 the city was given a mayor
appointed by the President and a city
council elected by the people;` in 1812
the city council was permitted to elect
the mayor. In 1820 and thereafter the
mayor was elected by the people. In
1874 when'the present Commission form
of government was first forced upon the
people of the District of Columbia, the
Congress ended home rule in Washing-
ton and for the first time in three-quar-
ters of a century no part of the District
exercised the right of suffrage. Next
June 20 it will be 92 years since the peo-
ple of the District of Columbia were de-
prived of home rule, a right until that
time never contested.
Why is it, Mr. Speaker, that this Con-
gress can, without a dissenting vote, per-
mit the 43,100 residents of the Virgin
Islands and the 67,700 residents of Guam
the right to elect their own Governor
while we cannot permit the 800,000 resi-
dents of the District of Columbia that
same right?
The zeal for home rule for every place
but Washington coninues unabated. Not
quite 1 year ago the Congress of
Micronesia met for the first time. This is
the bicameral legislature elected by the
91,700 citizens of the Trust Territory of
the Pacific Islands, over which our Na-
tion has jurisdiction as a result of a 1947
agreement with the Security Council of
the United Nations. American Samoa,
which we acquired in 1900, now has a
locally drafted Constitution which was
promulgated in 1960 and its 21,400 peo-
ple elect a House of Representatives.
The fight for home rule for Washing-
ton naturally brings publicity and it be-
comes more and more embarrassing and
more and more difficult to explain that
the residents of the capital of the might-
iest democracy do not have democracy;
that they are not permitted to elect their
own local government; that they have
no say in the disposition of the tax
money colldcted from them, a right ac-
corded to every other individual of vot-
ing age in every State and territory of
the United States.
There are many ambivalencies created
by man in his search for the best means
of achieving the common good and no
solution to the problems faced by human
government can please everyone. But
there are some 'problems which are eas-
ily solved. One of these is the right to
self-determination for the people of the
District of Columbia.
No. 81-19
In view of the action this body took
yesterday, how can we deny the Dist ict
of Columbia the same rights and v
ileges?
FREE WORLD TRADE WITH NORTH
VIETNAM
(Mr. MULTER (at the request of Mr.
PATTEN) was granted permission to ex-
tend his remarks at this point in the
RECORD and to include extraneous
matter.)
Mr. MULTER. Mr. Speaker, I have
asked the Department of State to com-
ment upon the extent of trade between
the free world countries and the Com-
munist North Vietnamese and what our
Government was doing to halt this trade.
I believe that the Department's answer
will be of great interest to our colleagues
and I, therefore, commend to their at-
tention the following information as
furnished to me by our able and dis-
tinguished Assistant Secretary of State
Douglas MacArthur:
The Department of State has been con-
cerned for some time over voyages by free
world ships to North Viet-Nam, and, through
sustained diplomatic efforts, has been suc-
cessful in bringing about an elimination of
ships from most countries in that trade.
High level approaches continue to be made
to those countries which still have flag ships
calling at North Viet-Nam,.and it is believed
that a reduction of such calls to a hard core
minimum is being achieved.
The volume of free world trade with
North Viet-Nam amounts to about 15 per-
cent of North Viet-Nam's total trade. This
is subject to the strategic embargo restric-
tions of the Coordinating Committee
(COCOM) countries (NATO countries and
Japan) governing strategic goods. Free
world exports to North Viet-Nam consist
mostly of textiles, foodstuffs and fertilizer.
Purchases from North Viet-Nam are mainly
anthracite, with occasional shipments of
apatite, rattan ware, fruits and vegetables.
Although we do not yet have complete data
on free world trade with North Viet-Nam
for the last half of 1965, preliminary esti-
mates indicate that there was a decrease in
that trade stemming from the sharp drop in
free world shipping to North Viet-Nam dur-
ing that period.
Since free world trade moves almost en-
tirely by sea, approaches have been made to
the countries concerned, through diplomatic
channels, in an effort to obtain their coop-
eration in controlling this shipping. Such an
approach is consistent with and in support
of relevant United States legislation and has
been remarkably successful. For the last six
months the monthly average of calls by free
world vessels at North Viet-Nam has dropped
to 13 as compared with 34 per month in 1964.
During 1965 and early 1966 the following
free world countries had one or more ships
call at North Viet-Nam: Cyprus, France,
Great Britain, Greece, Italy, Japan, Lebanon,
Liberia, Malta, the Netherlands, Norway, and
Panama. Many of these calls, however, were
made early in 1965, and in the last eight
months no Japanese, Lebanese, Dutch, Lib-
erian, or Panamanian ships have called at
North Vietnamese ports While France and
Italy each have had only one ship making one
call.
The free world shipments in question are
not being made by the governments con-
cerned, but by private traders in ships sailing
under various national registries. Each
country has special legal problems in con-
trolling such shipping which take some time
to resolve, but we have been making every
effort to obtain early and effective action.
10367
There were only three aid-recipient coun-
tries which had ships calling at North Viet-
Nam during the last eight months, namely,
Greece, Norway, and Cyprus. The Greek
Government has issued regulations making it
unlawful for their ships to carry cargo to or
from North Viet-Nam. Norway has taken
steps to remove its ships from the trade and
no Norwegian ships have called at North
Viet-Nam since November. We have dis-
cussed the matter with the Government of
Cyprus and are confident that the problem
relating to that country's ships will be re-
solved. Some of the ships of these three
countries are under long term charters to
Communist countries however, and thus not
under the control of their owners. Even so,
assurances have been received In some cases
that once these charters expire, the ships will
be removed from the North Viet-Nam trade.
The effectiveness of these measures will, of
course, be kept under continuing review, hav-
ing in mind the relevant legislation calling
for denial of aid to countries that do not take
appropriate steps to remove their ships from
the North Viet-Nam trade.
Most of the free world flag ships remaining
In the North Viet-Nam trade are under Brit-
ish registry, but it should be noted that few
if any are owned by United Kingdom resi-
dents. The majority are small coastal vessels
owned and registered in Hong Kong and by
virtue of their registry are entitled to fly the
British flag. Some are controlled by Chinese
Communist operators. They are on time
charters to Communist China or North Viet-
Nam and normally ply in trade only between
mainland China and North Viet-Nam. Brit-
ish owners of vessels registered in the United
Kingdom have either withheld or withdrawn
their ships from this trade or have indicated
they intend to do so as present charters ex-
pire.
On February 12, 1966, the Maritime Ad-
ministration announced in the Federal
Register that the President had approved a
policy of barring the carriage of United
States Government-financed cargoes shipped
from the United States on foreign flag ships
calling at North Viet-Nam after January 25.
This announcement contained a list of five
free world ships which have recently visited
North Viet-Nam and which are therefore
barred from the carriage of United States-
financed goods. Cumulative lists are being
published at frequent intervals.
The policy directive barring United States
Government-financed cargoes to ships can-
ing at North Viet-Nein was calculated to
supplement our diplomatic approaches and
the legislative provisions affecting recipients
of United States aid whose ships have been
In the North Viet-Nam trade. It is believed
that these measures will be adequate to re-
move most of the remaining free world ships
from the North Viet-Nam trade. If, however,
these measures are not successful further
action will be considered.
There has been improvement in the situ-
ation as far as British shipping is concerned.
The problem is now mainly with ships regis-
tered in Hong Kong flying the British flag.
The United Kingdom does not permit the
shipment of strategic materials to either
Cuba or Viet-Nam. Prime Minister Wilson
has also been one of the strongest supporters
of our policy in Viet-Nam. We are, none-
theless, seriously concerned that some Brit-
ish shipping continues to be involved in the
North Viet-Nam and Cuban trade. We have
made representations to the British Govern-
ment on this question.
THE USE OF TAX-EXEMPT BONDS
FOR FINANCING INDUSTRIAL EX-
PANSION NEEDS CONTROLS
(Mr. KEOGH (at the request of Mr.
PATTEN) was granted permission to ex-
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
10368 Approved For RFITsnippin& 9f,ADRT--Bofitmo0400070009-2
May 77, 1 9 9
tend hl,s remarks at this point in the
REcoaa and to include extraneous
matter.)
Mr. KEOGH. Mr. Sneaker, almost
every day we read in the financial press
of large, financially strong national com-
panies turning the tax-exempt status of
municipal bonds to their private advan-
tage. More and more municipalities in
all parts of the country are using their
credit to finance the construction of
giant industrial and commercial plants
for lease to such companies. Individual
bond flotations by small communities of
$90 million and more for this purpose
arc now commonplace.
About 3 years ago the Advisory Corn-
mission on Intergovernmental Relations
issued o, report, entitled "Industrial De-
velopment Bond Financing," in which it
pointed out some of the abuses and pit-
falls that stern from this practice: firms
with access to adequate financing using
the public treasury for their private
gain; communities overextending their
credit to provide facilities far beyond
their employment needs and in the proc-
ess overstraining their revenue resources
to meet unanticipated demands for pub-
lic services; and the rampant pirating
of industry by one community from an-
other that results from frenetic inter-
community competition for industrial
development.
Although only about a half billion dol-
tars worth of local industrial develop-
ment bonds had been issued up to the
time the Advisory Commission issued its
1..eport, we recognized that the practice
was growing and that safeguards were
needed "to minimize intergovernmental
friction, to insure that governmental re-
sources deployed for this purpose bear a
reasonable relationship to the public pur-
pose served and that the governmental
powers employed are not diverted for
private advantage." Indeed the prac-
tice has been growing apace. At least
another billion dolars worth of bonds has
been issued since 1962 to finance plants
or large, well-heeled firms. Communi-
ties in about three-fifths of the States
now engage in the practice.
The Advisory Commission recom-
mended that if the States insist on al-
lowing their localities to engage in in-
dustrial development bond financing,
they should control these activities by
providing the following safeguards:
Eirst. Subject all industrial develop-
ment bond issues to approval by a State
supervising agency;
Second. Restrict authority to issue
such bonds to local units of general gov-
ernm.ent ?counties, municipalities, and
organized townships;
'third. Limit the total amount of such
bonds that may be outstanding at any
one time in the State;
Pourth,. Prohibit such, financing for
pirating of industrial plants by one com-
munity from another; and
Fifth. Provide machinery for inform-
ing the public as to proposed industrial
development bond projects, and to enable
citizens to initiate referendums on such
projects.
,Etawaii enacted the Commission's sug-
gested legislation implementing those
recommendations in 1964, and Maine en-
acted parts of it in 1965. The other
States should follow suit, before the sys-
tem of industrial development bond fi-
nancing topples of its own weight and
in the process does irreparable damage
to local finances.
Mr. Speaker, waiting upon the States
to stop this unsound practice is not
enough. The Congress, too, shares in
this responsibility. My bill H.R. 324
strikes against the most blatant abuse of
the tax exemption privilege?the pur-
chase by a corporation of tax-exempt
bonds that are issued to finance a plant
it, intends to lease from the bond-issuing
community. It would deny the deduction
for income tax purposes of rentals paid
on facilities financed with industrial de-
velopment bonds in those cases where
the leasing corporation itself purchases
som.e of the tax-exempt securities.
HR. 324, as the identical bill H.R.
4069 introduced by my distinguished col-
league from North Carolina Mr. FOUN-
TAwl, would carry out the recommenda-
tions made to the Congress by the
Advisory Commission on Intergovern-
mental Relations.
Mr.. Speaker, this subject merits our
early attention. Further delay can un-
dermine the public's regard for the tax
exemption of bona. fide State and local
bonds.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN POPULA-
TION GROWTH. AND FOOD PRO-
D UCTION
(Mr. TODD (at the request of Mr.
PATTEN) was granted permission to ex-
tend his remarks at this point in the
RECORD and to include extraneous mat-
ter.)
Mr. TODD. ? Mr. Speaker, I ask the
following news item from the May 17
Washington Post be inserted in the CON-
GRESSIONAL RECORD to bring to the atten-
tion of my colleagues the relationship
between population growth and food
production. This news story corrobor-
ates the situation long anticipated by
agricultural economists. Solutions to
this deficit in food willL very mach de-
pend on the kinds of aid the United
States stresses to remedy the problem.
F'AO FINDS POPULATION OureAcrs
Foon GAIN S
ROMs, May 16?World food produ,:tion ap-
parently failed to keep up with population
growth last year and the prospect for this
year is no better, the U.N. Food and Agricul-
tural Organization (FAO) reported today.
"Neither food nor raw materia Is taken
separately are likely to have advanced in
step with population groth," said the or-
ganization's annual Commodity Review
based on information up to the niiddle of
March.
If later final figures show a production in-
crease in 1965, it will be small, the report
said. It added that production for 1965-66
was unlikely to keep up with the population
growth rate of 2 percent.
The group said that among developed re-
gions.. North America are! Western Europe
saw sizable, increases in agricultural produc-
tion. There was a small gain in Japan but
drought caused serious harvest redur Lions in
South Africa and Australia.
Among developing countries, Latin Amer-
ican production increased sharply but the
rapidly expanding population of the region
left the output per person basically un-
changed. Unfavorable weather cut produc-
tion in the far east, including India, and
in Africa.
In Communist economies, it sail. main-
land China appears to have nn,intained
grain production at 1964 levels but severe
drought in the Soviet Union and it: eastern
Europe sharply cut production there last
year, necessitating imports.
COLISEUM CONVENTION CENTER?
NEW HAVEN, CONN.
(Mr. GIAIMO (at the request of Mr.
PATTEN) was granted permission to ex-
tend his remarks at this point in the
RECORD and to include extraneous mat-
ter.)
Mr. GIAIMO. Mr. Speaker, I intro -
duce for appropriate reference, a bill
that would permit the city of New Haven,
Conn, to count certain expenditures as
local grants-in-aid. The city of New
Haven plans to construct a coliseum-
convention center as part of its Church.
Street redevelopment and renewal proj-
ect?Connecticut R-2.
The purpose of the Church Street
project is to feed new life into, downtown
New Haven, both economically and
culturally. The proposed convention
center would enhance and comoliment
the work already achieved in this pro-
gram. It would give an added boost to
retail outlets and increase business ac-
tivity of the downtown area. As a source
of attraction such a convention center
would have, it would naturally at tract a
large number of people outside the im-
mediate geographical area of the Church
Street project.
Section 110(d) of the Housing Act of
1949 prevents eligible costs of this proj-
ect to be defrayed as grant-in-aie. This
is because the convention centei would
serve an area beyond what is technically
defined as the urban renewal area of the
Church Street project, the very growth,
however, that such an urban renewal
project seeks.
I submit, therefore, Mr. Speaker, for
appropriate reference, a bill to permit
that, notwithstanding the ext, !nt to
which the coliseum-convention center
proposed to be built within the Church
Street redevelopment and renewal proj-
ect?Connecticut R-2?in New Raven,
Conn., may benefit areas other than the
urban renewal area, expenses incurred
by the city of New Haven in con Aruct-
ing such coliseum-center shall, to he ex-
tent otherwise eligible, be counted as a
grant-in-aid toward such project.
DEPENDENCY AND INDEMN /TY
COMPENSATION PROGRA NI
(Mr. HANLEY (at the request of Mr.
PATTEN) was granted permission to ex-
tend his remarks at this point in the
RECORD and to include extraneous mat-
ter.)
Mr. HANLEY. Mr. Speaker, yesterday
the House of Representatives saw fit to
unanimously pas H.R. 14347, a bill
which I was delighted to introduce, de-
signed to effect a cure for an inequity
which has been endured far too long by
dependent fathers, mothers, and orphans
of service men and women who died as a
result of service-connected injuries and
illnesses. This category of people are in
the minimal income bracket and have
had to cope with the increased cost of
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
_10304
strictions imposed in 1951. Much of
the business diverted from the Post Of-
fice by those restrictions has been taken
over by United Parcel Service, bus lines
and various other carriers.
Almost all the opposition to this bill
has been generated by one company, the
company that was provided a privileged
economic sanctuary under the 1951 re-
strictions.
I find it ironic that many of the attacks
on the proposed changes in parcel post
regulations are being palmed off as a de-
fense of private enterprise. It seems
highly questionable to me whether any
firm that wants the Government to sub-
sidize it by handling its high-cost busi-
ness while it retains all the low-cost,
high-volume traffic is even in private
enterprise.
One of the most regrettable aspects of
the whole situation is that some of the
forces opposing changes in parcel post
regulations have been putting out a lot of
misinformation. The bill would partially
restore?and I want to emphasize the
words "partially" and "restore"?parcel
post service to what it was before the 1951
change in the law. The public is being
told we are proposing "expansion" of
parcel post service.
It has been broadly hinted that em-
ployees of the firm benefiting from the
present setup would lose their pension
rights. The truth is the pension rights
of these employees are guaranteed by
law.
These employees also are being told
passage of the legislation will cost them
their jobs. Yet Postmaster General
O'Brien has publicly stated that the Post
Office Department will hire any employee
who is thrown out of work because of
this legislation. Postmaster General
O'Brien restated this pledge just last
week in a letter to the chairman of the
Post Office and Civil Service Committee.
I know the Postmaster General well
enough to know this is a good faith com-
mitment that he will honor. But I do not
think enactment of this much-needed
legislation will put very many, if any,
employees out of a job.
Unfortunately, this misinformation
has had some effect. Some railroad em-
ployees have expressed misgivings about
the bill. Apparently the propaganda
barrage has made them fearful liberal-
ization of parcel post restrictions would
be detrimental to their best interests.
Actually, passage of the legislation will
increase parcel post volume and mean
greater job security for railroad em-
ployees.
I reiterate what I said earlier. The
alternative to liberalization of parcel post
restrictions is a subsidized parcel post
system. The alternative to passage of
this bill is continued inadequate parcel
post service to the American public and
the American business community.
This bill is a reasonable proposal. It
in the public interest. It should b
enacted.
Approved ForP?1911a914,9?44443% fitkrtiltIN7-134044WI00400070009-71,fay 17, 1966
REVIEWING THE RECORD ON
VIETNAM
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr.
KREBS) . Under a previous order of the
House, the gentlewomen from Hawaii
L Mrs. MINH 1 , is recognized for 30
minutes.
Mrs. MINK. Mr. Speaker, it is now a
year since President Johnson requested
of the Congress a vote of confidence for
his Vietnam policies through passage of
the second supplemental appropriations
bill to bear the expenses of our involve-
ment until June 30, 1965. The President
at that time affirmed his sincere search
for peace through negotiations, a quest
which I readily seconded and which I
have been advocating ever since.
Now, in light of the recent unsettling
political events in South Vietnam, it is
incumbent upon us to review the de-
velopments during this year and our
reactions to them, and in fact, a search-
ing appraisal of our whole policy in
pursuit of some form of democratic self-
determination for the people of South
Vietnam is surely in order. Many of us
are deeply disturbed as to the present
conditions which do not appear to be
laying any substantial foundation for
truly free elections, as so many of us
desire. I urge the President to reaffirm
at this time America's commitment to
popular government in South Vietnam,
since this is the whole purpose of our
military and economic assistance to that
country. -
As a Member of the 89th Congress and
a concerned citizen, I include in the
RECORD the statements I have made in
regard to the developing situation in
South Vietnam, with the request that
the search for peace which I and so
many Americans earnestly desire not be
abandoned at this critical juncture:
THE USE OF GAS IN SOUTH VIETNAM
(March 25, 1965, letter to the President
signed by Representative PATSY T. MINK
and 15 other Congressmen)
The PRESIDENT,
The White House,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR M. PRESIDENT: The actions of our
military in South Vietnam in providing riot-
control type gases to the South Vietnamese
appear to have violated our long-standing
policy against the first use of gas in warfare.
This national policy was first enunciated
on June 9, 1943, by President Franklin Del-
ano Roosevelt, who said:
"Use of such weapons has been outlawed
by the general opinion of mankind. This
country has not used them, and I hope that
we never will be compelled to Use them. I
state categorically that we shall under no
circumstances resort to the use of such weap-
ons unless they are first used by our
enemies."
It was reaffirmed on January 13, 1960, by
President Dwight D. Eisenhower who said,
when asked at a press conference about our
government's policy on the use of gas in
warfare:
"So far as my instinct is concerned, (it) is
to not start such a thing as that first."
The first use of gas in warfare, however
innocuous its variety or effective its results,
subjects the using country to the censure
of the civilized world. In this instance it
undoubtedly will provide a basis for an ef-
fective propaganda campaign against our in-
volvement in Southeast Asia, could isolate
us from many of our friends, and may result
in a legacy of deep regentment in Asia.
In view of the above and the great con-
cern, 'both nationally and internationally,
over the use of gas in Vietnam and in the
hope that some action be taken in the inter-
est of our national prestige and moral stand-
ing, may we respectfully suggest:
1. That, since the area commander appar-
ently had authority to use these riot-control
gases, in case of civil disturbances, an investi-
gation be made into the means by which
such authority was extended to authorize
use of such gases in combat;
2, that exclusive control and direction over
the use of chemical, biological and radiologi-
cal weapons be restored to the Presidency and
finally;
3. that, in the light of former executive
pronouncements, an expression of this Ad-
ministration's policy toward the use of these
weapons be made.
Sincerely,
SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL DEFENSE
APPROPRIATION
(May 10, 1965, Statement on CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD page A2258)
The fifth of May, 1965 undoubtedly was a
day that I shall long remember for the men-
tal and emotional experience I just endured.
The President, concerned that the people of
the United States did not support his policies
in Viet Nam, called upon the Congress in an
extraordinary move to gain approval of his
program by asking for $700 million to the end
of June 30th, 1965. The President by this
request asked for a vote of confidence in his
leadership. It was readily acknowledged that
these fundts were not needed for the further-
ance of his policies in Viet Nam, for he has
the authority to use general funds of the
Defense Department, but that he chose this
means of asking for a vote of confidence in
his leadership to carry this to his avowed
ends of peace through negotiations without
conditions. '
I do not need to state my commitment to
peace, and my belief that peace can come
to Viet Nam only through the conference
table. And herein lies the conflict that I
faced in this vote. While I do not agree with
any policy of escalation of the war in Viet
Nam, it has consistently been denied by the
President and all concerned that this is in
fact the policy of the government of the
United States. Rather the President has re-
peated several times in recent weeks that the
policy of the United States is to seek an un-
conditional negotiation for the peace and sta-
bility of Viet Nam, and further that the
strategy now being pursued by this govern-
ment is to seek this just end to hostilities.
With this statement I cannot but heartily
agree. Our disagreement then, comes in not
knowing what the peace is which we want to
secure, nor how the conflict can be stabilized
th the end that the right of self-discrimina-
tion can be assured, and finally in the matter
of the strategy to accomplish these ends in
the fastest, most expeditious manner. And it
Is here at this paint that I find myself in
utter confusion. Without the facts and the
full explanation of the strategy involved,
which for obvious reasons cannot be revealed
If the strategy is to work, I cannot disagree
with the President purely on the assumption
that my analysis is superior to his judgment.
Facing this dilemma, I am asked by the Pres-
ident to express my confidence that the ways
in which he seeks to end this conflict by ne-
gotiation can best be achieved by the meth-
ods and plans that he has laid.
Had the President never stated that he was
pursuing a course which he personally be-
lieved would permit the earliest possible con-
vening of negotiations, I would have no
choice but to vote against his actions thus
far. But in the context of his avowed pur-
poses, I believed that he was entitled to pur-
sue his course with the support of the people
of the state of Hawaii, as cast by my vote as
one of its representatives.
Further the President has stated to the
Congress that without its overwhelming vote
of confidence, his actions are subject to
the interpretation by the government of
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
111363
Approved For&inedgpaR9a9liEMBP6711Vg
pR000400070009-2
ay I 7, 1966
farmer will arise to the occasion and
make his indignation felt. The farmer
is sick and tired of being taken for a
sacker by the desk farmers in the De-
mil-Uncut of Agriculture. Let's start
listening to the farmer rather than the
bureaucrat. The latest gimmickry is the
so-called stockpiling proposal of Mr.
P'reeman which would give him dicta-
torial powers over every phase of Agri-
culture. I am going to help the farmer
once more by opposing this punitive pro-
gram. Mr. Secretary, will you join us?
CONGRESSMAN MORRISON AN-
SWERS ATTACKS BY CONGRESS-
MAN DERWINSKI ON POSTMAS-
TER GENERAL LAWRENCE
O'BRIEN
'['he SPEAKER. Under a previous
order of the House, the gentleman from
Louisiana [Mr. MORRISON] is recognized
for 30 minutes.
Mr. MORRISON. Mr. Speaker, I re-
quested this time to clarify a situation
raised last week by the distinguished
gentleman from Illinois [Mr. DEBRWIN-
SKI I. It was implied in this Chamber
last week that Post Office Department
officials had acted improperly, and per-
Imps illegally, in supporting H.R. 14904,
a bill to revise parcel post rates and in-
crease the size and weight of parcels that
could be carried through the postal sys-
tem.
have a particular interest in this bill
since I have the privilege of being the
chairman of the subcommittee and the
vice chairman of the full committee
which approved it. It is no secret that
the Post Office Department strongly sup-
ports this measure. The distinguished
Postmaster General, Lawrence F.
O'Brien, and other postal officials testi-
fied in behalf of the bill on a number of
occasions.
But :I know of no instances in which
any postal official, in Washington, or
elsewhere, acted improperly in regard to
this legislation. As the gentleman from
Illinois said on the House floor last week,
the Postmaster General has a well-de-
served reputation for integrity. And I
want to assure the gentleman from Ill-
inois that from my vantage point as
chairman of the subcommittee which
considered this legislation I could detect
no actions by subordinates of the Post-
master General which would reflect dis-
credit on him or on the Department he
so ably heads.
1 was a bit troubled, however, by the
charge made here last week that the par-
cel post bill was "slipped" through the
Postal Rates Subcommittee. I hardly
think that accurately describes the han-
dling of a bill on which extensive public
hearings were held over a period of 2
mouths.
Voluminous testimony was taken on
this legislation from proponents and op-
ponents of the changes it calls for. Rep-
resentatives of the Post Office Depart-
ment, the REA and many other groups
were given ample opportunity to present
their views on the legislation. Tran-
seripts of the hearings have been printed
and are available to anyone who wishes
to review them.
The bill received full and open con-
sideration.
I might point out that the bill won
overwhelming endorsement in both the
Postal Rates Subcommittee and the full
House Post Office and Civil Service Com-
mittee. These votes reflect the well-
documented case developed at the hear-
ings that this bill is very definitely in
the public interest.
In recent years we have heard a lot
about fiscal responsibility. Passage of
this bill will permit the Post Office to
operate parcel post services in a fiscally
responsible manner. Failure of the Con-
gress to enact this bill will force tha Post
Office to continue operating parcel post
services at an unwarranted loss.
The predicament the Post Office finds
itself in today over parcel post stems
from a law enacted in 1051. The t law
sharply reduced the size and weight of
parcels that could be shipped parcel post
from iirst-class post offices. The pri-
mary purpose of the law was to provide
a financial shot-in-the-arm to a single
firm, the Railway Express Agence.
But the benefit to REA has been small
while the detriment to the postal service
and the public has been great.
Before 1951, the Post Office Depart-
ment operated a uniform parcel post
system. Packages less than 70 piunds
and 100 inches could be mailed any-
where in the United States.
The changes made in parcel poet reg-
ulations in 1951 established two zones
for shipment of packages between first-
class post offices. A limit of 20 pounds
and 72 inches was set on packages
shipped between, first-class offices more
than 150 miles apart and 40 pounds and
72 inches on packages -between first-
class offices less than 150 miles ape et.
The limit on packages shipped from
second-, third-, and fourth-class offices
remained 70 pounds and 1.00 inches.
The restrictions imposed by th?:? 1951
law have had a number of effects, all
bad.
The Post Office has been forced to
continue! providing service on rela Lively
large parcels shipped from rural ,,Lreas.
The cost of providing this service is high.
But the Post Office Department has
been severely restricted in the ixtrcels
it can handle in urban areas. The De-
partment has lost much of the high
volume, low cost service generated in
urban areas.
The 140 million Americans livhig in
urban areas are denied adequate parcel
Post service. Millions have been turned
away from post Office mailing windows.
These restrictions have produced con-
fusion and frustration.
For example, the Post Office ca el de-
liver a 70-pound, 100-inch package from
a business firm in Jersey City, N.J.. to a
village in Alaska, but it cannot deliver
a 10-pound, 73-inch package sent by the
same firm to a destination just across
New York State to Buffalo.
The restrictions have increased costs
for all users of parcel post, whether they
live in the city or the country. The ,same
law that established the new size and
weight restrictions also required the
Postmaster General to certify that parcel
post receipts were within 4 percent of
costs.
The loss of so much of its high volume,
low cost service forced the Post Office to
increase rates. This rate increase caused
a further decline in volume and another
rate increase was required. This unde-
sirable spiral continues.
Although farmers and others in rural
areas were supposedly not affected by the
1951 law because no change was made in
the size of parcel post packages they
could mail, they have suffered along with
everyone else from the higher rates made
inevitable by the restrictions on urban
service.
Some small businesses have attempted
to continue getting the full benefit of
parcel post service by shipping their
larger packages from other than eirst-
class offices. This not only places an
additional burden on the business firm,
because these parcels usually have ic be
delivered to a post office out of the firm's
immediate area in order to be mailed,
but it also is self-defeating in the long-
run.
Since the amount of revenue a post
office takes in determines its elms, if
enough business is diverted to a second-
class office to take advantage of the more
liberal parcel post size limitations, that
office ultimately will become a first-class
station.
The difficulties I have outlined aere,
all stemming from the restrictions im-
posed in 1951, have precipitated a crisis
in parcel post service. Encased in its
present straitjacket, parcel post simply
cannot be maintained on a break-even
basis. Unless changes are approved, it
will have to be subsidized.
The bill approved by the Post ('[lice
and Civil Service Committee would per-
mit this. Under the bill, a unForm
limit of 40 pounds and 100 inches would
be established for all parcels mailet be-
tween first class offices.
I want to point out this would mean
that the parcel post service in usban
areas would still be more restrictive ?,han
it was before 1951.
The bill also would increase parcel post
and catalog rates, a move that would in-
crease revenues about $63 million a year.
The total increase in revenue under the
bill would be $107 million, enough fl put
parcel post service on a self-financing
basis.
The establishment of a single sire and
weight limit for parcels mailed between
first class offices, rather than the present
two-zone setup, would simplify postage
computations and be less confusinp for
the public, businesses and postal clerks.
The Postmaster General would retain
his present authority over parcel post
rates. He would be required to certify
to the President and Congress thaa he
has taken action to bring parcel post
revenues in line with costs.
The bill is a reasonable one. It Likes
into consideration the interests of ,leo-
pie living in rural and urban areae, of
business and commercial operations, and
of the Post Office Department. It would
not, as has been charged, damage the
REA.
REA did not receive the great waid-
f all of business it expected from the re-
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
rcNtakysORRW9fie8MEB71406431fR000400070009-2
May 17, 1966 Approved Fo
North Viet Nam as not having the full
support of the American people. He has
explained that his hand would be weakened
In his efforts to bring the parties to the
conference table. His case is irrefutable.
Any leader without the support of his people
cannot display the resolution and convic-
tion that this kind of crisis demands.
And so, though I am first and foremost
committed to the cause of peace, I cast my
vote in support of the President; that I do
in fact believe his intent to seek a ne-
gotiated peace in Viet Nam. As an elected
representative of the people of Hawaii I
could not let my feelings as an individual
outweigh my responsibilities at this point,
and so I had to say to the President that we
of Hawaii do have confidence in his integrity
and sincerity to achieve the ends of peace by
means of negotiation.
The President said to the Congress in his
May 4th message:
"For, in the lang run, there can be no
military solution to the problem of Viet
Nam. We must find the path to peaceful set-
tlement. Time and time again we have
worked to open that path. We are still ready
to talk, without conditions, to any govern-
ment. We will go anywhere, discuss any sub-
ject, listen to any point of view in the in-
terests of a peaceful solution."
This was the basis of my vote of con-
fidence.
PRESS FOR IMMEDIATE NEGOTIATIONS
(August 25, 1965, Statement on CONGRES-?
SIONAL RECORD, page 21014)
Mr. Speaker, I rise today out of grave
concern that our dialogues for peace are
being smothered by partisan efforts to cast
upon our present Administration and upon
the Democratic Administrations of the past
the sole responsibility for the crisis that now
exists for us and for the world in Vietnam.
Let us not forget that since the Geneva agree-
ment of 1954 until 1960 this country was
led by the Republican Party and much could
be said about things that could have been
done then which might have prevented this
painful situation in that part of the world
today. But of what use is hindsight when
what we must seek today is a means to
end this war and to bring the parties to
the conference table. We must be looking
to the future and working through every
possible means to bring an end to this con-
flict.
I am thoroughly convinced that our
President is earnestly doing everything with-
in his power and resources to seek the peace
in Vietnam. I am equally certain that few
are completely satisfied with the progress
of our efforts to bring this matter to the
stage of constructive negotiation. However,
I believe that just as we are impatient that
the talks begin, still in our anxiety to end
this war, we must be willing to allow the
President the fullest degree of flexibility to
bring about the desired result. We can con-
tinue to urge the President to seek the in-
volvement of the United Nations, but he has
told us that he is doing everything possible
to take this matter to the U.N. Where
bombs failed to bring the necessary con-
ciliatory attitude, the President called for
a temporary cease-fire also to no immediate
avail. He has agreed to negotiate without
precondition, but still he has had no affirma-
tive response.
The critical period of the monsoons are
nearly over and we have been able to hold
our lines. I am firmly of the opinion that
Hanoi will, if not already, begin to under-
stand that the peace conference is the only
course left to take.
Being of this belief I do now urge the
President to persist in his repeated efforts
to draw Hanoi to the conference table in an
ever increasing demonstration of good faith
and determination that negotiations will in
fact begin.
Let us stop this dialogue of war and more
war preparations of blame and accusations
and begin in earnest our preparations for
peace. Certain of our goal why should we
wait. Let us ready the conference site. Let
us send to Geneva our country's foreign
policy technicians and statesmen now. Let
us commit our course for peace immediately.
Let us invite our allies to journey with us
once again to Geneva to resolve a new Peace
Treaty for Vietnam.
Let us hasten to sit as a nation determined
that our will for Peace shall be done. Let
us wait upon Hanoi in Geneva and in so
doing with this war with utter and complete
faith that our President is right in his great
expectations for Peace.
And finally let us promise now without
reservations that the bombs shall cease to
fall from the very instant that the nego-
tiations begin.
Let us be prepared to match every mili-
tary dollar that we have spent these past 11
years in Vietnam with a like dollar for peace,
for the restoration of this war torn country,
for its economic development, for education,
for food and medical care for its desperately
poor people.
Let us produce a lasting peace and credit
ourselves as a nation with faith that peoples
everywhere liberated from the fear of hunger
and deprivation will choose the way of free-
dom.
IN SUPPORT OF BOMBING MORATORIUM
(December 11, 1965, letter to President
signed by Representative PATSY T. A/mit
and 16 other Congressmen)
Hon. LYNDON B. JOHNSON,
President,
White House
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: Recently, the Chair-
man of the House Armed Services Commit-
tee publicly urged that the United States
extend its bombings to industrial and other
targets in the Hanoi-Haiphong area. Simi-
lar proposals have been made by the Minori-
ty Leader and the last two Republican can-
didates for President.
We write you at this time for the purpose
of stating our vigorous opposition to those
views and our whole-hearted support of the
Administration's continuing refusal to ex-
tend the bombings to Hanoi-Haiphong. We
believe that such an extension would not
bring an end to hostilities in Vietnam, but
might lead to further escalations of an un-
predictable character. Instead of saving
lives, such a change in strategy might ulti-
mately bring about a vast increase in Ameri-
can casualties. In addition, the likelihood
of massive civilian casualties in North Viet-
namese cities would undoubtedly produce a
world-wide reaction against the United
States government.
The undersigned are not all in agree-
ment as to the precise policies we should be
following in Vietnam. Some of us believe
that all bombing of North Vietnam should
be suspended, at least temporarily. Some
of us believe that we should make un-
equivocally clear that representatives of the
Viet Cong would inevitably have to be in-
cluded in any negotiations regarding the
future of South Vietnam.
Yet we are united in our conviction that
an extension of our bombings to Hanoi and
Haiphong would seriously jeopardize all ef-
forts to bring an early and honorable end
to the war.
Respectfully,
PETITION THE UNITED NATIONS
(January 21, 1966, letter to the President
signed by Representative PATSY T. Mnsns
and 75 other Congressmen)
WASHINGTON, D.C.?Representative PATSY
T. MINK, Democrat, of Hawaii, yesterday
urged President Johnson to formally request
the United Nations to seek an effective
cease-fire in Vietnam.
10365
Representative MINK joined 75 other con-
gressmen in informing the President of their
strong support of his vigorous efforts to bring
the war in Vietnam to the conference table
and in pledging support to a formal ap-
proach to the United Nations.
"I will continue to bend every effort to-
ward the accomplishment of a just peace in
Vietnam," Representative 151115c said. "It is
my strong conviction that the United States
must continue its . determined search for
peace, and that the United Nations can play
a leading role in this regard."
The text of yesterday's letter to the Presi-
dent follows:
JANUARY 21, 1966.
The PRESIDENT,
The White House,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR M. PRESIDENT: We strongly support
the vigorous efforts you have undertaken to
bring the war in Vietnam to the conference
table. Specifically, we applaud you for the
moratorium on bombing North Vietnam and
for the extensive personal contacts you have
initiated with the leaders of other nations to
make clear our unrelenting desire for a just
peace. We would like to suggest that you
further consider one additional dimension to
this diplomatic offensive, that we formally
request the United Nations to seek an effec-
tive ceasefire and that we pledge our support
and our resources to such an effort.
While the response from the other side has
not been encouraging, we do not believe we
should yet assume that the door has been
firmly closed. We cannot expect that a con-
flict which has raged so bitterly for so long
will be quickly or easily resolved. Neither
can we ignore the alternative to negotiations.
A prolonged and probably expanded war with
attendant costs in human suffering and ma-
terial resources.
We staunchly support the determination
of our Government to resist the terror and
aggression which deny the people of South
Vietnam the right freely to determine their
own future. We continue to support you in
that commitment. We recognize that there
are those who urge a resumption Of bomb-
ings of North Vietnam and a premature
abandonment of our peace efforts. We are,
however, concerned that unless we can halt
or reverse the escalation of the last months
it will become increasingly difficult to
achieve a further pause, a cease-fire and
meaningful negotiations. We urge you,
therefore to continue your present deter-
mined search for peace until such time as It
becomes clear that no reasonable hope re-
mains for a just settlement by peaceful
means.
Sincerely yours,
LIMITED MILITARY OBJECTIVES IN VIETNAM
(March 1, 1966, Statement signed by Repre-
senative PATSY T. MINK and 77 other Con-
gressmen regarding supplemental defense
authorization of 1966, on CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD, page 4254)
Mr. Chairman, we will vote for this supple-
mental defense authorization. The support
of the American and allied troops who are
fighting in South Vietnam requires it.
We agree with President Johnson's state-
ment that "we will strive to limit conflict, for
we wish neither increased destruction nor
increased danger." We therefore reject any
contention that approval of this legislation
will constitute a mandate for unrestrained or
Indiscriminate enlargement of the military
effort, and we strongly support continued
efforts to initiate negotiations for a settle-
ment of the conflict.
We, in particular, wish to express our con-
currence with the President's statement of
last week in which he declared the Viet-
namese conflict to be a limited war for
limited objectives calling for the exercise of
"prudent firmness under careful control."
Approved For Release 2005/06/29: CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
WIRW719y646R000400070009-2may
10366 Approved For Rel~t5/8%2A9L: uSE 17c1966
The fact that this document and the
principles which it espoused have been
the law of the land for over 150 years
stands as clear tribute to the framers of
the Constitution. Its measure of
strength was seen in 1884 when the King
agreed to appoint a council which had
the confidence of the Storting, thus in-
troducing parliamentarianism. liniver-
sal suffrage was granted to men in 1893
and women in 1913.
Nowegians are justifiably proud of the
system of government they have built
on the Constitution of 1814. Norwae
prospers todaY and offers a living testi-
monial to the staying power of a demo -
cratic government.
Mr. Speaker, in my district this is a
very festive occasion and I recall with
great warmth the gay parades mei
parties that always marked the day.
Many times in the past I had the happy
fortune to be able to join in the fe,s -
tivities with these fine people. And so
it gives me a special pleasure on thI;
important date to join with all Norwe-
gians and Americans of Norwegian birth
or descent in celebrating the historic
event which took place in Norway 152
years ago.
E.ixpetrrioN or Soirrn VrsimAmEss
BusnYvissmAtt
(March 15, 19(16, Statement On CONGRESSIONAL
IltEcorin, page 5572)
A grave travesty on justice has been per-
petrated by the government of South Viet-
nam in the name of social and economic
reform. The public justification for this
execution was. and I quote yesterday's Wash-
ington Post, "to fulfill Ky's pledge to Presi-
dent Johnson at the Honolulu Conference to
put South Vietnam's social and economic
house in order." For all the Influence that
we have on this regime, we did nothing to
stop this senseless public execution which
makes a mockery of our whole system of
justice.
Out of the Honolulu Conference came a
display of unity of purpose of our two govern-
ments. There was renewed, good will in the
joint resolve and reaffirmation to help the
people of South Vietnam succeed In their own
efforts to secure a. better life, but this recent
spectacular exhibit of -totalitarian edict to
secure certain ends points to the vastly dif-
ferent worlds we truly live in.
General Ky's goals and ours may be the
same, but can we, in the eyes of the Asians
whom we seek to influence and to save from
Communism, embrace his methods of the
firing, squad by our silence and our
acquiescence?
I urge the President and the Vice President
to quickly intercede to prevent these extreme
measures :from becoming the means by which
all of his social and economic problems are
SI lved
I est we make a mockery oi7our valiant and
tragic sacrifice of the lives of our American
,,fouth who need to have complete faith in
the integrity of the South Vietnamese gov-
ernment, we must forcefully insist that its
leadership understand and apply to its own
people the same moral and ethical code of
conduct that has caused our American
soldiers to give their lives for the sake of the
ideals of a democratic society.
This barbaric act must not be allowed to
bo repeated! To accept this kind of a solu-
tion to an economic phenomenon is to in-
vite the easy road to ultimate ruin without
treating the cause at all! A thousand ex-
ecuted profiteers will not boy a stable
economy or a new social order.
i3UPPORTING FaEIT ETEGTMDIS TN SOUTH
(May Ii, 1966, Statement on CONGRESSIONAL
I.'.' 'inn, page 9839)
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to note that
Seeretary Dean Husk has reinforced this na-
ticra's determination to abide by the prin-
;Utile or self-determination with respect to
the forthcoming elections in South Vietnam,
despite the ambiguous reported statements
of Prime Minister Ky which his own col-
leagues found necessary to censor.
After the ontirnistic declarations of the
:Honolulu Conference in February about the
intentions of the South Vietnamese govern-
meet 1;0 implement reforms and free elec-
tions as early `IS possible, we have witnessed
accelerated plans to prepare for those elec-
tions this fall after the people of Vietnam
took to the street a themselves to demand a
democratic form of government.
Skeptics are pointing out that the Viet-
namese have never experienced free elections,
and. therefore cannnot be trusted to make a
rapid transition to popular government.
ff we are ever to know the true will of
these people, we must do everything we can
ensure that the elections are held and
that the results will be uneontestable, re-
a:mallosi; of the outcome.
Those who agitate for these elections ask
ouly for a hand in the destiny of their coun-
try, and since that is the professed reason for
our presence in Vietnam, I believe that we
must now insure that the voices of all inter-
ests will be heard in the conduct of that
country's affairs.
With Secretary Rusk's assurances that we
will indeed, honor our commitment to self-
determination for South Vietnam, it now be-
comes incumbent upon us not to leave open
the possibility of later charges that the elec-
tions were not in fact "free."
Excessive caution in this matter is further
dictated by Premier Ky's reported etatement
that if the elections do not have results
desirable to the present reg7me, then the
Directorate will fight! This must. be re-
garded as a real danger sign and steps must
be taken now to insure the absolute validity
of these elections. The closest surveillance
is absolutely basic!
But, I think it wholly unrealistic for us
to place ourselves in the untenable position
of being the sole third-party monitor of
these elections. Although our ford 'n policy
leaders insist that we will abide by the wishes
of the people of South Vietnam fair, rilless of
the outcome, there looms of course the qual-
ification that the election be truly "free" and
expressive of the "will" of the people of that
war-torn nation. It is therefore, in toy opin-
ion, unwise for us to assnme by airselves
this responsibility as the judge and jury of
weighing the quality of those electioos.
I therefore join the distinguished Senator
from Connecticut in urging that the Presi-
dent most seriously consider the proposal
that either the United Nations or the Inter-
national Control Commission be called in to
maintain a field surveillance of these elec-
tions, and thereby relieve this country of the
untenable task of being the guarantor of the
outcome. If our commitment truly is to
freedom in Southeast Asia, than we have a
solemn obligation to implement the condi-
tions for that freedom. We owe the world,
the Vietnamese people, and ourselves no less.
NORWEGIAN CONSTITUTION DAY
(Mr. ROONEY of New York eat the re-
quest of Mr. PATTEN) was granted per-
mission to extend his remarks at this
Point in the ITECoRD and to include ex-
traneous matter.)
Mr. ROONEY of New York. Mr.
Speaker, today is the 1520 anniversary of
the signing of the Norwegian Constitu-
tion at Eidsvoll, near Oslo. The Nor-
wegian Constitution is among the oldest
in the world and although, like our own,
it has undergone amendment and sub-
stitution it still remains the fundamental
law of the country.
The con sLitution drawn in Norway in
1814 leaned heavily on Norwegian legal
precedent, but it also absorbed a great
deal of the 18th century liberalism which
produced the American Declaration of
Independence and Constitution, the
French Revolution, and the great ex-
pansion of democracy in Britain.
Tradition led the parliament to be
called the Storting, named after a quasi-
democratic body which in the 9th and
10th centuries had been an instrument
of royal power., But liberalism led. the
Norwegians to also put into effect the
doctrine of separation of powers devel-
oped by the Montesquieu in France and
adopted as the basis of our system of
government. In addition to dividing
power between the executive branch?
the King in council?the
Parliament?and the courts, the Norwe-
gian Constitution adopted the doctrines
of national independence, popular sov-
ereignty and the rights of the individual
versus the state.
HOME RULE FOR WASHINGTON
(Mr. MULTER (at the request of Mr.
PATTEN) was granted permission to
extend his remarks at this point in
the RECORD and to include extraneous
matter.)
Mr. MULTER. Mr. Speaker, yester-
day this body reaffirmed one of the basic
principles upon which this great Nation
was founded: the right to self-determi-
nation, the right to choose one'.; own
elected representatives, the right .sot to
be taxed without representation.
Yes, Mr. Speaker, without a dissenting
vote this body passed legislation yester-
day to enable the Island of Guam and
the Virgin Islands to elect their Gover-
nors.
The committee reports on these two
bills ring with the praises of the peoples
of these two territories. I quote for ex-
ample from the committee's report on
the bill to permit the Virgin Islay ds to
elect its Governor:
It is clear . . that the people mC the
Virgin Islands have had long experience in
electing one branch of their govrenmenil
and thus in participating in the making of
their own laws. It is the belief of the cam-
mittee that the people and their legislature
have . . . exercised their powers in a re-
sponsible manner.
I quote from the committee report on
the bill to provide for the election cf the
Governor of Guam:
Following World War II . . . the Isle t it has
made remarkable economic, political and
social progress. . . . The people of Guam
have now had 16 years' experience in elect-
ing their own legislature and have demon-
strated their capacity for doing so in a re-
sponsible manner.
I am certain that these. two very
com-
mendable bills will be speedily passed by
the Senate and signed by the President
and I will be the first to congratulate
the peoples of these two territories upon
the achievement of this long sought goal.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
May /7, /966Approved For RONC41.269M/.29, JCIIMERIDP67-131(446R000400070009-2 70355
averhourly earnings, relative wage and
productivity trends, output per employee and
peg _Capita, and profit requirements; the
bealing of wage rates upon the balance of
payments problem; and the competitive ef-
fects of wage rates upon related industries
on the mainland."
In accord with the foregoing, sub-sections
(d), (e), and (f) of Section 8 become sub-
sections (e), (f), and (g).
The Commonwealth Government is ex-
ceedingly conscious of the validity of the
concern over the rapidly narrowing margin
of Puerto Rico's locational advantage that
Professors Reynolds and Gregory emphasize
at the conclusion of their discussion on
Wages, Productivity and Employment.,8 De-
spite the fact that the praising of labor income
has been and will continue to be a primary
goal of the Commonwealth Government gen-
erally, that government is indeed faced with
the dilemma mentioned in their study by
Messrs. Barton and Solo, namely, "that a
very rapid rise in industrial wage rates has
been retarding that economic growth which
is the source of expanding labor income and
which is its hope for absorbing the unem-
ployed into productive and remunerative
work." ,-,
The Commonwealth Government supports
the proposals that have been reiterated by
all those who have objectively examined the
impact of wage policy upon the Island's im-
perative need for optimum economic growth,
namely that the statutory provisions con-
taining the unduly rigorous and discrimina-
tory controlling criterion applicable to in-
dustry committees in Puerto Rico should be
ameliorated so as to adequately reflect the
growth needs of the Puerto Rican economy.
It must simultaneously, of necessity, oppose,
with just as much force, any proposal for
across-the-board automatic increases which
would blandly ignore almost all economic
realities and jeopardize all the hard-won
ains of "Operation Bootstrap."
0
VCAMBODIAN AID AND COMFORT TO
? THE VIETCONG
(Mr. CHAMBERLAIN asked and was
given permission to address the House for
1 minute and to revise and extend his re-
marks and include news articles.)
Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Mr. Speaker, a
number of press reports in recent days
have given added evidence of the aid and
comfort the Vietcong receives from Cam-
bodia. Two news stories in particular
point to the flow of contraband through
the Cambodian port cities of Sihanouk-
vine on the Gulf of Siam and Phnom
Penh on the Mekong River. As I said in
this Chamber on May 4 in a speech on
this very subject I am satisfied that free
world ships sailing up the Mekong River
through South Vietnam into Cambodia
are a factor in the "backdoor" aid the
Vietcong is receiving from across the
Camobdian border. While in South Viet-
nam last month I was shocked to learn
from an informed naval officer that while
410 free world ships passed through
South Vietnam into Cambodia during
1965 that we have no effective control
over this traffic to prevent the flow of
goods which we have good reason to be-
lieve in part are destined ultimately for
the Vietcong.
In view of the overwhelming evidence
of Prince Sihanouk's open economic and
political support of the Vietcong I belietre
that South Vietnam should be urged in
la Op. cit., p. 103.
l9 Op. cit., p. 42.
the strongest manner possible to close
the Mekong River to all Cambodian-
bound ocean traffic, and I have asked the
President to do just this. The conditions
under which the treaty which made the
Mekong International Waterway was
signed and the friendly relations between
the riparian states it envisaged have
been radically altered by the growing
hostility of the Cambodian Government.
It is time that pressure be brought to
bear upon Cambodia to live up to its al-
leged foreign policy of strict neutrality
in the hope that the war itself will not
spread into that country.
Mr. Speaker, under unanimous consent
I insert at this point in the RECORD the
following dispatches of R. W. Apple, Jr.,
entitled, "Port of Cambodia Tied to
Vietcong," which appeared in the New
York Times of May 15, 1966; and Jack
Foisie, of the Los Angeles Times, entitled
"Cambodia's Only Big Port Is Called
Depot for Russian Military Supplies,"
appearing in the Washington Post, May
16, 1966; and the articles "Hitting the
Sihanoukville Trail," in the May 13, 1966,
Issue of Time magazine; and?Birming-
ham-Borderline Case" in the May 16,
1966, issue of Newsweek magazine:
[From the New York Times, May 15, 1966]
PORT OF CAMBODIA TIED TO VIETCONG?U.S.
INTELLIGENCE SUSPECTS FLOW OF MATERIEL
(By R. W. Apple, Jr.)
SAIGON, May 14.?Intelligence experts here
are convinced that Soviet and Chinese war
materiel is being landed at a new Cambodian
deep-water port for shipment to Vietcong
and North Vietnamese troops fighting in
South Vietnam.
There is no absolute proof of this. How-
ever, a Western businessman managed re-
cently to obtain credentials to enter the
closely guarded port and has provided a de-
tailed picture of its operations.
The port, Krong Presh Sihanouk?also
known by its French name, Sihanoukville?
was built under a French aid program in
the late nineteen-fifties at the entrance of
Kompong Som Bay, an inlet of the Gulf of
Siam.
The businessman said he had seen a Soviet
ship unloading large quantities of medical
supplies and small-arms ammunition at a
pier. Soviet vessels with military cargoes
call regularly at the port, Cambodian officials
told him.
DESTINATION IS UNISNOWN
Although he learned that the ship had
stopped at Canton in southern China just
before sailing into the Cambodian port, the
businessman was unable to establish whether
her cargo was for the Cambodian army or for
the Vietcong.
Prince Norodom Sihanouk, Cambodian
chief of state, who denies that his country
Is giving assistance to the South Vietnamese
insurgents, has turned increasingly to the
Soviet Union for munitions and equipment
for his own armed forces. The French also
supply some items.
There are at least two principal routes by
which military equipment could reach Viet-
cong from the port.
Narrow but navigable canals wind across
the South Vietnamese-Cambodian border in
the Mekong delta area, and sampans move
without hindrance from one country to the
other. The frontier is about 75 miles from
the Cambodian port, over a network ,of sec-
ondary roads adequate for truck traffic.
Neither the United States nor South Viet-
nam makes any effort to patrol the frontier
in this area because it is firmly under Viet-
cong domination.
An alternate route that could be used to
deliver war material to Vietcong forces op-
erating in the Central Highlands involves
roads and trails. A 143-mile national high-
way leads from the port to Pnomperth, and
from there a newly discovered "Sihanouk
trail" winds through Cambodia and Laos
into South Vietnam near the Chuphong
mountain massif.
The Mekong River is also a possible ave-
nue of supply, but the South Vietnamese
authorities maintain a fairly effective border
patrol on the river's principal branches.
The French-built port was completed in
1960. At first it was nothing more than jet-
ties and tin huts, but a town of 10,000 has
developed in the last 5 years and a major
improvement program is under way.
By 1968 the port will have a new break-
water, a larger harbor and more berthing
spaces for ships. The breakwater would help
protect the port against southwesterly mon-
soon winds, which now buffet ships lying at
the exposed piers.
The improvement program is also financed
by the French under a long-term loan at 2
percent interest. Cambodia was a French
protectorate until she won independence in
1953.
A railroad connecting the deep-water port
of Pnompenh is also under construction.
[From the Washington (D.C.) Post, May
16, 1966]
CAMBODIA'S ONLY BIG PORT IS CALLED DEPOT
FOR RUSSIAN MILITARY SUPPLIES
(By Jack Foisie)
SAIGON, May 15.?Activities at "neutral"
Cambodia's only deepwater port of Sihanouk-
ville include Russia freighters unloading
military goods, a Western businessman who
visited the port recently reported yesterday.
The Vietnamese government has often
charged neighboring Cambodia with supply-
ing the Vietcong with arms and other mili-
tary supplies. Cambodia's chief of state,
Prince Norodom Sihanouk, vigorously denies
such allegations.
The Westerner, who was able to obtain
cerdentials to enter the closely guarded port
on the Gulf of Thailand, said he observed
a Soviet vessel unloading cases of medicines
and small-arms ammunition.
ARRIVED FROM CHINA
He learned that the vessel came from
Canton, a Chinese Communist port. But
he was unable to determine positively the
origin of the military cargo or its ultimate
user.
Cambodia's own armed forces are supplied
mainly by the French. Cambodia was a
French protectorate, and although independ-
ent since 1953, French influence is still
strong.
From sources here it was learned there
Is unimpeded sampan traffic moving from
lower Cambodia through canals into the
Delta area of South Vietnam.
The canal systems near the border are
in areas under Vietcong control. It is as-
serted here that this is one route by which
supplies unloaded at Sihanoukville reach
the Vietcong. The port is about 75 miles
from the border, with a secondary road sys-
tem to get the cargo to the canal boats.
RIVER TRAFFIC POLICED
Another possible channel for the war
supplies would be to truck them from Si-
hanoukville over 143 miles of paved road
to the Cambodian capital of Phnom Penh.
There they could be put aboard river steam-
ers heading down the Mekong through South
Vietnamese territory. However, there is rea-
sonably effective policing of this traffic by
the Vietnamese.
The Westerner was able to obtain a com-
prehensive account of conditions in the areas
of Cambodia he visited.
The port of Sihanoukville, he said, was
built by the French and completed in 1960
to give CambOdia its first salt water port.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
O356 Approved For peAftwg9040,6A2p ikAcIRD6711iRMR000400070009May17, :)36
nut the summer monsoon winds buffet
iihips and interfere with cargo operations in
open roadstead. To correct this defi-
eieney, the harbor is being enlarged, a
breakwater is being added, and more berths
for ships and more space for warehousing
:toe being provided. Work should be com-
pleted by early 1968. It is being financed
by a French government loan.
RAIL LINK TO CAPITAL
A railroad connecting Sibanonkville to
onnom Penh is expected to be finished in
Meanwhile, the upstart port is becoming
inlay, despite its handicaps. This is partly
flue to Sihanottk's aggressive modernization
ia his country, and partly due to his care-
rid waltzing between Russia and Communist
Cilium Both provide him with military
and economic support.
his relations with the French remain con-
stant if not enthusiastic. His relations with
kid! thiited States were severed last year after
the Prince's abrasive condemnation of
American -.assistance to South Vietnam.
to the tarst year of operation. 1960, the
port was visited by only 15 ships. Compare
Ibis slow start with 1965, when 266 ships
called at Sihanoukville. They brought 754,-
500 tons of cargo. The imparts came mainly
from France, Russia, Poland and Czechoslo-
viikia.
:.0.e1': U.S. TRADE
Despite the lack of diplomatic relations, a
little trade continues with the United States.
American-bound latex (raw rubber) is trans-
hipped at Singapore. Some American ma-
chinery reaches Phnom Penh, apparently
tran.sstapped at Saigon to river steamers
inswing upstream under special American
export licenses.
In the wily ways of the Far East, even
lambodia and South Vietnam manage to
''anti nue trade and transportation ties.
The Western traveler said he came away
ram Cambodia believing that the Prince
iflay decide to rea.ssoclate his nation with the
West.
-Oho Russians and Red Chinese seem to
Ill' rocking the country back and forth with
nil and demands," he said. "France is in
heavy with aid and hard cash for industrial
growth. The Prince's Indonesian friends are
becoming more friendly with the Western
world.
?
"The Pr: nee may need to make a decision
for the West. or be enveloped by the Russian
or Red Chinese way of life."
Prom Time magazine, May 13, 1966(
,`?>oOTHEAST Asia HITTING THE SIHANOUK
An eerie lull settled over Southeast Asia
last week, broken only by the rumble of
Polish-built trucks on Red infiltration routes
idai the steady thump of American bombs
aimed at interdicting them. The lull was re-
flected in South Viet Nam by battle statis-
tics: the Viet Cong and their North Vietna-
nhise allies suffered only 456 dead in the
previous week - -the lowest toll since January
(965--and even when U.S. air cavalrymen
surroinided three Red regiments near Bong
-ion last week, the bulk of the Communist
Force slipped furtively away. The enemy bat-
talion that was finally trapped put up a good
fight-- but reluctantly. The Reds were sav-
ing their strength for the monsoon, waiting
For the rain-rich thunderheads that hamper
American air sLrikes. And they were doing a
ifit or their waiting in the sanctuary of
ileighboring, "neutral" Cambodia.
Of tate, Prince Norodom Sihanouk has
irKiikLy admitted that Communist troops
have been using Cambodia for "rest and rec-
reation" between battles. In April the Prince
lminded over seven tons of dried fish to a
Viet Clang representative in a ceremony at
Pnompenh's royal palace. Last week Ameri-
can officials in Saigon disclosed that U.S.
troops near the town of Lo Go on the Cam-
bodian border had received heavy weapons
fire from Cambodian territory, and were ulti-
mately forced to silence it with howl tier fire.
Even more interesting evidence of Sihanouk's
cooperation with the Communists was the
discovery of a new infiltration route into
South Viet Nam--a chain of truck roads,
bicycle trails and rivers that providee trans-
port for supplies moving north and east out
of Cambodia to some of the most important
fighting areas of South Viet Nam. It has
come to be known as the "Sihanouk I rail."
The new route?a supplement to tlie maze
of paths and, roads leading south called the
flo Chi Minh Trail?was discovered by the
Laotian air force, whose commander Briga-
dier General Thao Ma, had been kei?ping
close eye on Cambodia since last September.
About that time, Ma received reports GC activ-
ity along the Se Kong River, a tributary of
the Mekong. Near its 'banks could be heard
the sound of blasting and rumble or heavy
equipment in a region virtually empty of in-
habitants. By early April, Ma's aviators could
follow the trail for 69 miles from Cambodia to
where it entered South Viet Nam. Last week
Time Correspondent Don Neff flew over the
Sihanouk Trail in one of SiX Laotian T-28
fighter-bombers led by General Ma. His
report:
-We left [lie Laotian airstrip at I` ikse at
II) :25 a.m., flying at 2,500 fl, Some a3 into-
sites later, rely pilot announced: 'We are
now at the Cranbodian border.' Two minutes
later we had located the trail. It snaked
Oat of Cambodia, clear as a road mat. The
run, was flet and only spottily foliaged.
I could see the Se Kong River in the back-
ground. A note I made at the tiros says:
'No question about it. Frorn the river going
cast (toward South Viet Nam) is a large
road. The trail winds and turns, (lie trees
growing thicker in a narrow valley.' Some-
times we lost sight of the road. But it seems
site to conclude that it is one con tinuous
trail capable of carrying trucks from Cam-
bodia through Laos into Viet Nam. We flew
eastward, diving to less than 1,000 It, for
as close a look as we could get. We ltwitted
to unload our ordnance?two 'lapin n can-
isters, 24 rockets and '700 rounds of .50-eal,
machine-gun ammunition per plane?in a
heavily forested area about four kilometers
north of the Cambodian border. Ole after
another, our pls,nes dived in, hoping to hit
hidden trucks under the foliage."
As many as 40 trucks a day use the gravel-
Lopped Sihanouk Trail. The trail bristles
with 12.7-mm, antiaircraft emplaconents,
s
nil other sources say that there fire at
Isost 30 Viet Cong supply depots strung
along its length. A dozen North Viet namese
regiments are currently poised for action in
South Viet Nam, and of these, at lest four
are inside Cambodia. Half of the remaining,
eight are within easy marching distance of
the Cambodian sanctuary and the supply
lines of the Sihanouk Trail. Its sorategic
value to the Communists is an an alternate
route to the Ho Chi Minh Trail. This main
south-bound network has been impts ived by
200 miles of new roads surfaced with ''rushed
stone and often concealed by bamboo trel-
lises covered with branches. Down it flow
an estimated 5,500 to 7,000 men each month.
In an effort to stem the tide, Guara-based
B-52 Strat,oforts last week carpet-nombed
infiltration outlets in South Viet Nam's
"Zone C" for the eighth time in eleven days.
But only Ma and his antique, prop-driven
T-28s have been hitting the Sihanouk Trail.
Since Cambodia's Sihanouk now offers the
Reds active support, he is risking a widening
of the war. If the Communist monsoon.
offensive is to be checked before the rains
come, both trails must be severed ---For at
least heavily interdicted?before they join
up in a ribbon of men and supplies that
cannot be cut. Though there is at
aica-
tiosi that the U.S. will cease to i amect
Sihanouk's phony neutrality, his pobc," in-
evitably carries with it the chance that,Thore
and more of the bullets of war will spill over
into Cambodia itself.
f From Newsweek magazine, May 16, :966)
BIRMINGHAM ?BORDERLINE CASE
It was Saturday morning, the 30th of
April, when elements of the U.S. Fast In-
fantry Division ("The Big Red One") moved
northward along the Cai Bac River on the
border between South Vietnam and Cain-
bodia. As the GI's backed their way through
the dense jungle underbrush near the tiny
village of Lo Go (map) they suddenly ran
into heavy fire. There was a 'brief skirmish,
then a heavy barrage of mortar and auto-
matic-weapons fire pounded in on the Amer-
icans from the west bank of the river- across
the border in Cambodia. The U.S. troops
answered with heavy artillery, pouring rouna
after round across the Cai Bac until tit e hos-
tile fire was stilled.
The incident, the first in the Vietnam war
in which the U.S. openly admitted tiring
artillery into neighboring Cambodis, was
part of a massive sweep through ern:Acid Tay
Ninh Province, an operation code-aamed
Birmingham. It was also the most dainiatie
event of a week that saw an end come to the
month-long lull in the ground war in South
Vietnam.
In another major operation called Davy
Crockett, units of the First Cavalry Division
(Airmobile), backed up by South Vietnamese
troops, landed in three places last Weilmaday
in the fertile farming land north of the city
of Bong Son, 280 miles northeast of Saigon.
After four days of fierce fighting, friendly
casualties" were described as light, while 416
of the enemy lay dead and over 500 suspected
Viet Cong were captured.
But if Davy Crockett was a most site iessfut
example of how to kill Viet Cong, it w is Op?-
eration Birmingham, on the Cambodian bor-
der, that was strategically the most signifi-
cant of the week. Carried out by 15,000 U.S.
and Vietnamese troops, its major objective
was to sweep through Tay Ninh Province,
disrupt the infiltration route from the north
and destroy the staging areas the Vier Cong
might use if they launch the much antici-
pated offensive this month after the mon-
soon rains begin to fall.
Jungle cover: As of last weekend, Oper-
ation Birmingham had resulted in only 94
enemy dead, but, said a U.S. military a sake.:
manthirty base camps were destroyed along
the Cambodian border. Located -under the
triple-canopied jungle cover, the cam( s were
well dug in behind log bunkers and aig-zag
trenches, Barracks with room, all told, for
thousands of enemy soldiers, were put to the
torch. And war materiel, perhaps the big-.
gest cache of the war, was destroyed. In one
camp, 500 yards from the Cal Bac River. 6,000
uniforms with "Made in China" labelS Were
found. In another, GI's came upor 1,000
pairs of "Ho Chi Minh sandals," made of
tire casings and inner tubes, in various stages
of manufacture. One U.S. unit overran 0.
huge, but empty, hospital complex.
It was quite a haul, and First Di viSiOn
spokesmen seemed convinced that they had-
temporarily at least?cut off a major :oipply
route across the Cai Bac River and limo War
Zone C, the Viet Cong stronghold northwest,
of Saigon. And if Cambodian sovei eignty
was bruised, the Americans in the field_
were still certain that it was well worth it.
The Cambodian Government, pred.ctably
enough, insisted last week that its territory
had been violated. The attack from across
the Gal Bac, said Radio Phnom Penh, was
made not by the Viet Cong. The barrages
were fired at the U.S. troops by Cambodians
defending the frontier against the "daily ag-
gressions" of the United States,
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
May 17, /96Approved For Rtgesafgapg?tVOME WRI157_110ftlegip00400070009-2
TliYimer1cans, almost to a man, laughed
off this explanation. On the Cambodian
sicif...tof the river, say the U.S. troops, there
were chutes constructed which enabled
sampans to pull under the lower end and take
on rice, clothing and equipment for transport
across the river. On the Vietnam side, the
Viet Cong had fashioned a system of pulleys
and hoists to use in unloading the sampans
under a cover of trees.
Given all this, U.S. officials in Saigon last
week were fully satisfied that the First Divi-
sion commander in the field had acted
properly in replying with artillery when his
men were hit from the other side of the river.
According to rules announced late last year,
officers may take the necessary steps to pro-
tect their units, even if this means firing into
Cambodia. And, says Maj. Gen. William E.
DePuy, commander of the First Division, or-
ders have been given by him to every one of
his units down to the squad level that "if
they were fired at across the border, they were
to fire hack." Added DePuy: "I personally
approved the artillery fired across the border
at Lo Go. I not only approved it, I directed
It." As for the results, DePuy said: "I know
damn well that we killed them all over the
place."
HAWAII HEARS OF RETIREMENT
PLANS OF ITS STATEHOOD CHAM-
PION?REPRESENTATIVE LEO W.
O'BRIEN
(Mr. MATSUNAGA (at the request
of Mr. PATTEN) was granted permission
to extend his remarks at this point in the
RECORD and to include extraneous
matter.)
Mr. MATSUNAGA. Mr. Speaker, one
of the most highly respected and ad-
mired Members of this august body has
revealed that he plans to retire at the
conclusion of the 89th Congress. This
news, I am sure, has been received with
much regret by the people of this State
and of the Nation, for LEO W. O'BRIEN
has had an illustrious career as a dedi-
cated statesman and legislator. I am
also sure that those of us who have had
the privilege of knowing him intimately
and who desire for him, above all else,
his personal happiness, wish him well as
he lays his plans for retirement.
Retirement, in a sense, marks the
beginning of a different byway in life's
long journey, and he is truly a fortunate
man who is able to savor something of
the bypaths after he has successfully
traversed the main road, which for Con-
gressman O'BRIEN was that of a success-
ful and distinguished legislator. One
of the fascinating byroads which he
hopes to take includes a family trip to
Hawaii where he is revered as the
"Father" of statehood.
The Honolulu Star-Bulletin's Wash-
ington reporter, Frank Hewlett, reveals
in his "Reporting From Washington"
column that the hardworking chairman
of the territories subcommittee of the
House Interior Committee wishes to see
his bills which provide for the popular
election of the Governor and the Lieu-
tenant Governor of Guam and the Vir-
gin Islands passed before he retires at
the close of the 89th Congress. Mr.
Hewlett states that Congressman
O'BRIEN hopes that the Senate would
pass the bills as a farewell gift to him.
Both bills received favorable considera-
tion on the floor of the House yesterday.
I submit for inclusion in the CONGRES-
SIONAL RECORD the article which revealed
to Hawaii's citizens the planned retire-
ment of the champion of statehood for
Hawaii. It appeared in the April 27,
1966, issue of the Honolulu Star-Bul-
letin:
[From the Honolulu Star-Bulletin, Apr. 27,
19661
REPRESENTATIVE O'BRIEN OF NEW YORK,
CHAMPION OP TERRITORIES "FATHER" OF ISLE
STATEHOOD, RETIRING FROM CONGRESS
WASHINGTON.?Representative LEO W.
O'BRIEN of New York, "father" of the Hawaii
and Alaska Statehood laws, has decided to
retire from Congress.
The 65-year-old lawmaker says he wants
to spend more time with his family. He in-
sists he is not sick, and thinks he could win
another term from his upstate New York
district, but believes it's a good idea to move
out at the end of the 89th Congress.
"I'd like to take my grandchildren out in
the Pacific and show them some of the
Islands I've visited," he said. As chairman
of the territories subcommittee of the House
Interior Committee, O'BRIEN has become well
acquainted with the Pacific area. He spon-
sored the legislation to convert Hawaii and
Alaska from territories to states.
O'BRIEN'S final project in Congress is an
attempt to get authority for Guam and the
Virgin Islands to elect their own governors.
The bills are moving well through the House,
but seem to be stirring little enthusiasm in
the Senate. O'BRIEN is expected to work on
the Senate, once his measures pass the House,
to go along with him as a farewell gift.
PERSONAL EXPLANATION
Mr. VIGORITO. Mr. Speaker, on
rollcall vote No. 98 I was absent due to
attending a dedication ceremony for a
day center for our senior citizens, in Erie,
Pa.
If I had been present I would have
voted "yea."
Mr. Speaker, on rollcall vote No. 100
I would have voted "yea."
CORRECTION OF RECORD
Mr. DEL CLAWSON. Mr. Speaker, I
ask unanimous consent to correct the
RECORD.
On page 10070, under the list Repub-
licans Voting for the Report," I ask that
the RECORD show that the "Mr. CLAUSEN"
who voted was not a member of the com-
mittee. That was Mr. DON H. CLAUSEN.
On page 10071, in the statement of the
distinguished chairman, where he men-
tions a member of the committee, "Mr.
CLAWSON," voting for the bill, correct
the RECORD to show that it was not Mr.
DEL CLAWSON, who was a member of the
committee.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from Cali-
fornia?
There was no objection.
CONSTITUTION DAY?NORWAY
(Mr. PELLY (at the request of Mr.
HALL) was granted permission to extend
his remarks at this point in the RECORD
and to include extraneous matter.)
Mr. PELLY. Mr. Speaker, as Mem-
bers of the U.S. House of Representa-
tives, we are deeply aware of the mean-
10357
ing and significance of our Constitution.
Indeed, our very oath of office requires
us to pledge that we will uphold the Con-
stitution which has been the firm foun-
dation and guide for the development
of our great Nation and the guarantee
of our freedoms.
Perhaps our preoccupation with our
own Constitution causes us all too often
to overlook the constitutions of other
nations of the world, constitutions which
are equally meaningful and important
to the governments and citizens of their
respective countries. In an effort to
remedy this situation, I would like today
to pay tribute to the Norwegian Con-
stitution.
May 17 is a most important day for
the people of Norway and their many
friends and relatives all over the world.
It will mark the 151st anniversary of the
Norwegian Constitution of 1814. To all
Norwegians, this is truly a momentous
and gala event for which they deserve
our congratulations.
The adoption of the Norwegian Con-
stitution signalled a major step in the
country's drive for independence which
came to fruition in 1905. While the
Norwegian people had long agitated and
struggled for their national freedom,
from the end of the 14th century all such
movements were frustrated. Neverthe-
less, the spirit of freedom and liberty and
individual self-expression which char-
acterizes the country today continued at
an increasing pace.
Caught up in a reluctant partnership
with Denmark, Norway became em-
broiled in the Napoleonic wars as an ally
of France. According to the Kiel treaty
of January 14, 1814, Denmark was to
cede the territory of Norway to Sweden
without Norwegian consent. Denmark's
Governor in Norway, Prince Christian
Frederick, quickly called together a Con-
stitutional Assembly which drafted a
Constitution for Norway which met
swift approval on May 17, 1814. Prince
Christian was elected king by the Nor-
wegian National Assembly.
Sweden immediately undertook to
crush the new entity, but after a short
period of violence, a truce was signed.
The treaty resulted in Norway's union
with Sweden but as a separate kingdom
under the King of Sweden. However, the
king agreed to recognize the Norwegian
Constitution. This union lasted until
1905 when under peaceful circumstances
the Norwegian Parliament voted for in-
dependence. Thus the constitution
drawn up 91 years earlier exercised a
major influence in the emergence of an
independent Norway.
As Americans, we should feel proud
that our own Constitution was one of
those exercising influence upon the Nor-
wegians as they undertook to write their
own document. Certain provisions were
borrowed verbatim and others lent their
influence. But the document is really
a tribute to the devotion of the Nor-
wegian people to their historic high
Ideals for freedom and justice, and is
truly a Norwegian product. Those
ideals have long since become a reality
in Norway, and that is one of the many
reasons I salute Norway and her people
on the 151st anniversary of the Consti-
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
10358
Approved
F?E1NtalttaWMFkR6iti9e5M9Y3VR0004000700Qatay 17, L)36
tution Day. May they continue to be
an inspiration to others and celebrate
many more such anniversaries.
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT RE-
INSTATING PRAYER IN SCHOOLS
AND PUBLIC PLACES AND THE
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF THE
EXISTENCE OF GOD
(Mr. CRAMER (at the request of Mr.
[TALL) was granted permission to extend
his remarks at this point in the RECORD
and to include extraneous matter.)
Mr. CRAMER. Mr. Speaker, I am to-
day introducing a proposed amendment
to the Constitution that will remove the
prohibition imposed by the Supreme
Court on public prayer.
In 1962 the Supreme Court ruled in the
case of Engel against Vitale that a daily
recitation of a short prayer by New York
schoolchildren was an unconstitutional
violation of the 1st and 14th amend-
ments of the Constitution. The State
Board of Regents of New York had writ-
ten a short nondenominational prayer
containing the following words:
Almighty God, we acknowledge our de-
pendence upon Thee, and we beg Thy bless-
ings upon us, our parents, our teachers, and
our country.
It was recommended that each school
board in the State adopt this prayer, al-
though there was no requirement to do
so. Student participation, in the prayer
was entirely voluntary. Any student
could remain silent, or upon request by
parents, be excused from class during
the prayer.
In ruling that this procedure was un-
constitutional, Mr. justice Black stated:
IL is no part of the business ol the govern-
ment to compose official prayers for any
group of American people to recite as part
of the religious program carried on by gov-
C rnment.
The High Court in 1963 similarly
struck down, as unconstitutional, State
laws requiring that a passage from the
Bible or the Lord's Prayer be read?with-
out comment? at the start of each public
school day. 1 am referring to the case
from Pennsylvania of Abington Town-
ship against Sehempp and the case from
Maryland of Murray against Curlett, in
which the Supreme Court said the Gov-
ernment must be completely neutral with
regard to religion; it must neither aid
nor hinder religious activity in any re-
Ail a result, of these decisions, the
people in my State?Florida?have also
lwen told through the circuit court in
a decision that was not appealed that
the observance of religious holidays, such
as Christmas and Easter, by pageants
and plays at public schools, are contrary
to the provisions of the Constitution.
The prohibition on public prayer has
been the subject of litigation in courts
across the land. Cases have arisen in
Massachusetts, New Jersey, Delaware,
Idaho, Michigan, New York, and Vir-
ginia, that prohibit public prayer under
the strictures of these Supreme Court
rulings. A striking, and not untypical,
example of the effect of the prohibition
is found in the Oshinsky case from New
York. Mr. Oshinsky, the principal of
School District No. 184 in Whiteetone,
N.Y., ordered his kindergarten teachers
to stop reciting in class a simple, old
fashioned, 13-word prayer with their
morning cookies and milk. The rotayer
we all know went as follows:
God is great, God is good,
And we thank Him for our food.
I am forced to say that I cannot believe
the founders of our Nation, those wise
men who composed our Constitation,
ever intended for that great document
to prohibit such behavior. I belieee the
constitutional amendment I am peopos-
ing would restore, rather than change,
our Constitution.
Public prayer has been a part of this
land since the pilgrims first gathered on
these shores. No man could doubt the
strength and comfort, the guidance and
hope, that public prayer afforded our
colonial forebears. Let us not forget
that religious motivation was an import-
ant element in colonization and creation
of this Nation.
Today we ccammenced this session of
the 89th Congress with a prayer by the
Reverend Latch. In doing so we follow
the tradition that legislators haee fol-
lowed since the first session of the Con-
tinental Congress, in September 1774.
Yet tomorrow the Supreme Court may
tell us that is unconstitutional and pro-
hibit us from such prayer.
The Court, when 'telling the State of
New York that it was violating the Con-
stiution by writing a 22-word prayer for
students to recite, also observed that?
What New York does on the opening of its
public schools is what each House of Con-
gress does at the opening of each day's
business.
I refer, of course, to the decision that
opened this era of prohibiting public
prayers, Engel against Vitale.
I suggest that the constitutionality of
our opening prayer may someday be
challenged, because I know the Members
of this body would not tolerate its aboli-
tion. We have all taken a, solemn oath
to uphold the Constitution, but I know
of no Member of this body who believes
that our prayer is an unconstitutional
exercise, despite the fact that Justice
Douglas stated in his concurring opinion
in the Engel case that our activ .ties are
comparable to those activities deemed
unconstitutional.
I should like to ask my colleegues to
imagine their personal reaction if the
Court were to prohibit our opening
prayer. Indeed, I am sure we all can
appreciate and understand why good
people throughout the land are upset
with the Supreme Court's prohibitions of
prayers and Bible readings in public
schools.
During the last Congress, the Judiciary
Committee, of which I em a member,
held extensive hearings on proposed
amendments to the Constitution relating
to school prayer. These hearings are a
public documentation of the necessity for
the amendment that I have introduced
today.
The proposed amendment I have in-
troduced would not only reverse the
Court; decisions prohibiting peayer in
public schools, but would also pi vent
any interpretation of the Constitntion
that might prohibit the Federal or Statte
Governments from referring to or relying
upon God in conducting the business of
government.
I do not stand alone in making this
proposal. Beside me I find colleagues
belonging to both political parties and
standing behind us are scores of men end
women of all faiths and beliefs. n rte
language of the proposed amendment, I
believe, largely reflects the work or a
special, bitarsian ad hoc committee, on
which I served, that was created by some
50 Members of this body who are par-
ticularly interested in the problem.
It is sheer folly to think that cat ? tau-
preme Court is infallible and the t
rulings are sacrosanct. Abraham Inn-
coin, in commenting on the Drel Scott
case, spoke of the Court's fallibility and
concluded:
I believe the decision was improper Ii
and I go for reversing it.
The same judgment is appropriete for
the school prayer decisions, and I go for
reversing them through the available
Constitution amendment process.
I believe the Supreme Court's school
prayer decisions and the lower court rul-
ings that are following in their wake,
pose a serious threat to religious liberty.
I am deeply disturbed by these decisions,
as are millions of other Americans. This
amendment does not seek to rebuke the
courts; rather it calls for a redeclaration
by all Americans that we are, always
have been, and will continue to be, a
nation under God.
(Mr. DERWINSKI (at the rem eett ci
Mr. HALL) was granted permission to ex-
tend his remarks at this point si the
RECORD and to include extie tneous
matter.)
FMr. DERWINSKI'S remarks will ap-
pear hereafter in the Appendix.]
CONSTITUTION DAY?NORWAY
(Mr. ANDREWS of North Dakota Ont
the request of Mr. HALL) was g rented
permission to extend his remarks at this
point in the RECORD and to inch de ex -
traneous matter.)
Mr. ANDREWS of North Dakota. Mr.
Speaker, 152 years ago today, the people
of Norway adopted their ConO
Like our own Nation's revered document,
it has borne up well under the et ress Cf
time, emerging stronger and even more
responsive to the freedom of the people
it serves.
Over the years, a great many eens ann
daughters of Norway came to tilt; 'cones
try and lots of them came to settle in the
State of North Dakota. As early day
settlers, they were strong and spirited
in the tradition of their homeland and
they were well equipped to meet tie,'
rugged challenge of the new land. The
importance of the role they played?act
continue to have?in the growth and
progress of North Dakota is well demon-
strated by the fact that every segment
of our State's economic, education, cul-
tural, political, and spiritual order counts
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
10316 Approved For Releemara6/ ALCIA:RUP6.7_B00446R000400070009-2
ESS1ULN RECORD - HOUSE May 17, 1966
..(zia, Idaho; and $65,000, Berlin, New Hamp-
shire.
Also included is $636,600 for improvements
and additions at the following wildlife
refuges-$148,600, Camp Cornelia, Okefeno-
kee Wildlife Refuge, Georgia; $100,000, Sand
Lake National Wildlife Refuge, South Da-
kota; $38,000, Lake Andes National Wildlife
Refuge, South Dakota; $200,000, Eufaula,
Alabama;
In addition, $200,000 for the construction
of a fish genetics laboratory at Beulah, Wyo-
ming; $16,000 for improvement of the access
road to Interstate Highway 94, Northern
States Prairie Wildlife Research Center,
Jamestown, North Dakota; $100,000 for con-
tinued rehabilitation, Wichita Mountains
Wildlife Refuge, Oklahoma; and a decrease
of $177,000 for the operation of -three na-
tional fish hatcheries, which amount has
been transferred to the appropriation item
for the management and investigations of
resources.
-Amendment No. 22. Appropriates $500,000
for Appalachian Region fish and wildlife
restoration projects as proposed by the Sen-
ate instead of $1,000,000 as proposed by the
House.
Amendment No. 23. Appropriates $2,675,-
000 for Anadromous and Great Lakes fisheries
conservation as proposed by the Senate, and
deletes language "to remain available until
expended".
Amendment No. 24. Appropriates $1,549,-
000 for general administrative expenses as
proposed by the House instead of $1,564,000
as proposed by the Senate.
National Park Service
Amendment No. 25: Appropriates $35,932,-
800 for management and protection instead
of $35,694,000 as proposed by the House and
$36,171,600 as proposed by the Senate. The
increase provided over the House bill includes
an additional $82,500 for operation of new
park areas and an additional $156,300 for
the operation of new facilities in existing
park areas.
Amendment No. 26: Appropriates $22',894,-
000 for construction as proposed by the
House instead of $23,494,000 as proposed by
the Senate.
Office of the Solicitor
Amendment No. 27: Appropriates $4,704,-
000 for salaries and expenses as proposed by
the Senate instead of $4,650,000 as proposed
by the House.
Office of the Secretary
Amendment No. 28: Appropriates $4,998,-
900 for salaries and expenses instead of
$4,984,100 as proposed by the House and
$5,051,700 as proposed by the Senate. The
increase of $14,800 is for one additional posi-
tion in the Office of the Budget.
TITLE II-RELATED AGENCIES
Department of Agriculture
Forest Service
Amendment No. 29. Appropriates $173,-
850,000 for forest land management instead
of $172,821,000 as proposed by the House and
$174,521,000 as proposed by the Senate. The
increase over the House bill Includes:
$410,000 for construction of a dam at the
Trout Pond Recreation Area, George Wash-
ington National Forest, West Virginia;
$25,000 for planning of a visitor center,
Mammoth Lakes, California, Inyo National
Forest; $100,000 for recreation development,
Monroe Reservoir, Wayne Hoosier National
Forest, Indiana; $100,000 for recreation man-
agement, Boundary, Waters Canoe Area,
Minnesota; $90,000 for additional recreational
facilities, Lake Michigan Recreation Area,
Michigan; $105,000 for construction of a
bathhouse, Lake Glendale, Shawnee National
Forest, Illinois; $85,000 for preparation of
plans and specifications, headquarters build-
ing, Black Hills National Forest, Custer,
South Dakota; and $114,000 for the installa-
tion of an elevator at Blanchard Springs
Caverns, Ozark National Forest, Arkansas.
Amendment No. 30. Appropriates $37,821,-
000 for forest research, instead of $34,955,000
as proposed by the House and $38,578,000 as
proposed by the Senate. The increase over
the House bill includes: $110,000 for the
Beaver Creek project, Arizona watershed pro-
gram; $140,000 for additional staffing at the
Forest Service Laboratory, Morgantown, West
Virginia; $50,000 additional staffing at the
Forest Service Laboratory, Alexandria, Louisi-
ana; $40,000 for additional staffing at the
Forest Service Laboratory, Bottineau, North
Dakota; $100,000 for Alpine snow and ava-
lanche control research, Fort Collins, Colo-
rado; $125,000 for additional staffing at the
Southern Hardwood Laboratory, Stoneville,
Mississippi; $143,000 for preparation of de-
sign and specifications, Forest Service Labor-
atories---$28,000, Lincoln, Nebraska; $40,000,
Burlington, Vermont; and $75,000, Durham,
New Hampshire; $450,000 for construction
of a Silviculture and Animal Problems Lab-
oratory, Olympia, Washington; $690,000 for
construction of a Forestry Sciences Labora-
tory, Carbondale, Illinois; $1,,Q00,000 for the
construction of an addition to the Forestry
Sciences Laboratory, Athens, Georgia; and
$18,000 for additional staffing at the Forest
Service Laboratory, Rapid City, South Da-
kota.
Department of Health, Education and
Welfare
Public Health Service
Indian health activities
Amendment No. 31: Appropriates $73,671,-
000 as proposed by the Senate instead of
$73,250,000 as proposed by the House. The
increase provided over the House bill in-
cludes: $100,000 to establish an area-wide
preventive mental health program in Alas-
ka; and $321,000 for the operation of a health
clinic in Rapid City, South Dakota to care
for indigent Indians in that city.
The conferees are in agreement that
$250,000 of available funds which the House
directed be used along with the increased
appropriation of $250,000 to combat tracho-
ma, be restored to the Hospital Health Serv-
ices budget, and be distributed among con-
sultant services to broaden medical coverage
and improve quality of care, maintenance,
and rehabilitation for overcoming the ex-
isting backlog in that work, and equipment.
Amendment No. 32: Appropriates $13,464,-
000 for construction of Indian Health facil-
ities instead of $13,000,000 as proposed by the
House and $13,928,000 as proposed by the
Senate. The increase provided over the
House bill includes: $87,000 for the renova-
tion of a building in Rapid City, South Da-
kota for use as an outpatient clinic; $93,000
planning funds for a Public Health Service
Indian hospital at Claremore, Oklahoma;
and $284,000 for sanitation facilities.
National Capital Transportation Agency
Construction, Rail Rapid Transit System
The conferees direct that this appropria-
tion shall be available only after an amount
equal to one-half of this appropriation has
been provided by the District of Columbia as
required by Public Law 89-177.
National Foundation on the Arts and the
Humanities
Amendments Nos. 33, 34, 35, 36, and 37:
Appropriate $9,000,000 for salaries and ex-
penses as proposed by the Senate instead of
$7,000,000 as proposed by the House. The
increase over the House bill provides $2,000,-
000 for the National Endowment for the
Humanities under section 7(c) of the act.
Amendment No. 38: Adds Senate language
providing that no funds under this appro-
priation item may be used for any grant or
other payment which is to be used directly
or indirectly for the destruction of the Metro-
politan Opera House in New York City.
Smithsonian Institution
Amendment No. 39: Appropriates $22,523,-
000 for salaries and expenses as proposed by
the House instead of $22,844,000 as proposed
by the Senate.
The conferees are in agreement that $50,000
of available funds under this appropriation
item shall be used by the Office of Exhibits
for preparation of an Alaskan Centenary
Exhibit.
National Gallery of Art
Amendment No. 40: Appropriates $2,718,-
000 for salaries and expenses as proposed by
the Senate instead of $2,694,000 as proposed
by the House.
Corregidor-Bataan Memorial Commission
Amendment No. 41: Appropriates $25,000
for salaries and expenses as proposed by the
House instead of $35,000 as proposed by the
Senate.
W/NPIELD K. DENTON,
MICHAEL J. KIRWAN,
JULIA BUTLER HANSEN,
Joinsr 0. MARSH,
GEORGE MAHON,
BEN REUEL,
JOSEPH M. MCDADE,
FRANK T. Bow,
Managers on the Part of the House.
SUBCOMMITTEE NO. 5 OF THE COM-
MITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that Subcommittee
No. 5 of the Committee an the Judiciary
may be permitted to sit during general
debate today.
The SPEAKER. Without objection, it
Is so ordered.
There was no objection.
CORRECTION OF ROLLCALL
Mr. SHIPLEY. Mr. Speaker, on roll-
call No. 101, on May 16, a quorum call, I
am recorded as not answering to my
name. I was present and answered to
my name. I ask unanimous consent that
the permanent RECORD and Journal be
corrected accordingly.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from
17)1
was no objection.
PERSONAL ANNOUNCEMENT
Mr. HELSTOSKI. Mr. Speaker, on
Monday, May 9, I was granted an offi-
cial leave of absence from the sessions
of the House for the period of May 9
through May 16, for the purpose of
traveling to Vietnam as a member of the
Government Information and Foreign
Operations Subcommittee of the Com-
mittee on Government Operations.
With our distinguished chairman, the
gentleman from California, the Honor-
able JOHN Moss, we spent the week in
a factfinding mission and held hear-
ings on the overall situation of our as-
sistance to the South Vietnamese people.
During this period I missed several
rollcalls on which I would like to state
my position on the legislation then un-
der discussion.
On rollcall No. 91, on the amendment
to restore the $20 million for the rent
supplement program, I would have voted
"aye."
On rollcall No. 92, on the passage of
the independent offices appropriation bill,
I would have voted "aye."
On rollcall No. 94, on the passage of
the Military Medical Benefits Act, to au-
thorize an improved health benefits pro-
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
Approved For ReleaseZ005/06/29 ? _CIA.7RDR6MOi46R000400070009-2
&fay 17, 1966 CONGRESStuN AL KECURD - ti
imendment insert "$173,850,000"; and the
eenate agree to the same.
Amendment numbered 30: That the House
recede from its disagreement to the amend-
ment of the Senate numbered 30, and agree
to the same with an amendment, as follows:
In lieu of the sum proposed by said amend-
ment insert "$37,821,000"; and the Senate
agree to the same.
Amendment numbered 32: That the House
recede from its disagreement to the amend-
ment of the Senate numbered 32, and agree
ID the same with an amendment, as follows:
in lieu of the sum proposed by said amend-
ment insert "$13464,000"; and the Senate
agree to the same.
The committee of conference report in dis-
agreement amendment numbered 5.
WINDIELD K. DENTON,
MICHAEL J. EIRWAN,
JUiAA BUTLER HANSEN,
JOHN 0. MARSH,
0E0IZGz MAHON,
HEN ftEIFEL,
.J1,:DDIT M. MCDADE,
FRANK 'I'. BOW,
Managers on the Part of the House.
CARL HAYDEN,
Rn-TEASED B. RUSSELL,
?RHIN L. MCCLELLAN,
ALAN Manz,
RoDERT C. BYRD,
KARL E. MUNDT,
Mirsrosi- R. YOUNG,
Managers on the Part of the Senate.
;;TATEMENT
1110 managers on the part of the House at
a conference on the disagreeing votes of the
two Houses on the amendments of the Sen-
ate to the bill (H.R. 14215) snaking appropri-
ations for the Department of the Interior
and related agencies for fiscal year ending
jun? 30, 1067, and for other purposes sub-
mit the following statement in explanation
MT the effect of the action agreed upon and
recommended in the accompanying confer-
ence report as to each of such amendments,
namely:
TxTLE I.--DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Public Land Management
Bureau of Land Management
Amendment No. 1: Appropriates $48,855,-
000 for management of lands and resources
instead of $48,755,000 as proposed by the
House and $48,970,000 as proposed by the
:esnate. 'the increase over the House bill Is
for the identification, evaluation, and survey
M islands in Minnesota and Michigan.
Amendment No. 2: Appropriates $3,032,000
for construction and maintenance instead of
$2,900,000 as proposed by the House and
$3,062,000 as proposed by the Senate. The
increase over the House bill includes $100,000
:For the construction of an office building in
Malta, Montana, and $32000 for development
if the Fort Meade Recreation Complex on
he Makotapi Project in South Dakota.
Bureau of Indian Affairs
Amendment No. 3: Appropriates $114,690,-
SOO for education and welfare services in-
stead of $114,475,000 as proposed by the
['louse and $115,051.300 as proposed by the
Senate. The illcreare over the House bill
provides an additional $200,000 for the high-
er education prognim and $15,300 for em-
ployment of a probation officer for the Turtle
Mountain Indian Reservation, North Dakota.
The conferees are in agreement with the
Jlenate proposal that of the amount recom-
mend for resources management, the agri-
cultural extension program shall be funded
in the amount of $1,707,000, the same
amount as was available in fiscal year 1966;
and that housing development will be
fonded at a level ot $1,209,000. This action
will replace in the agriculture extension ac-
iivity that amount which was proposed to
he taken from it and added to the Housing
Development Program.
Amendment No. 4: Appropriates $56,118?-
000 for construction, instead of $55,325,000
as proposed by the House and $56,848,000 as
proposed by the Senate. The increase pro-
vided over the House bill includes: $325,000
for construction of kitchen-dining facilities
at Flandreau Indian School, South DakeLa;
and $468,000 for construction of high school
facilities at Maddock? North Dakota.
The conferees are in agreement with he
proposal of the Senate for the allocation of
the $2,000,000 reduction made in the Hosts?
bill to specific items in the construction
program.
The conferees are also in agreement tOiat
in instances whore water is a :factor in the
location of a school construction, funds are
not to be requested until a site with an
adequate water supply is found.
Amendment No. 5: Reported in techmcal
disagreement. The managers on the pars of
the House will offer a motion to provide
$468,000 to the Maddock, North Dakota, Pub-
lic School District No. 9 for construction of
a public high school.
Amendment No. 6: Appropriates $16,839,-
000 for road construction (liquidation of
contract authorization) as proposed by the
Senate instead of $16,754,000 as proposed by
the House. The increase of $135,000 over
the, House bill is for grading and surfacing
the, road between Grass Mountain and St.
Francis on the Rosebud Indian Reservation,
South Dakota.
Amendments Nos. 7 and 8: Delete the lan-
guage prohibiting the use of tribal funds to
purchase land or water rights in Wyoming
if such acquisition would result in the pur-
chases being exempt from local taxation, as
proposed by the Senate.
Bureau of Outdoor Recreation
Amendment No. 9: Appropriates $3,910.000
for salaries and expenses as proposed by the
House instead of $3,960,000 as proposed by
the Senate. The conferees are in agreement
that $50,000 of available funds shall be used
10r surveying recreational opportunities and
recommending development of the Missouri
River area between Yankton, South Dakota,
and Fort Benton, Montana.
Land and Water Conservation Fund
Amendment No. 10: Allocates $65,703,000
of the Land and Water Conservation Fund
for assistance to States as proposed by the
Senate instead of $76,203,000 as proposed by
the House.
Amendment No. 11. Allocates $23,471.500
of the Land and Water Conservation Fund
to the National Park Service as proposed by
the Senate instead of 8:17,9711,500 as pro-
posed by the House.
Amendment No. 12. Allocates $18,093,000
of the Land and Water Conservation Fund to
the Forest Service as proposed by the Senate
instead of $13,093,000 as proposed by the
House.
Geological Survey
Amendment No. 13. Appropriates $80,032,-
000 for surveys, investigations, and research
instead of $72,782,000 as proposed by the
House and $80,932,000 as proposed by the
Senate. The increase provided over the
House bill includes: $6,000,000 for explora-
tion and discovery programs relating to
heavy metals in short supply in the United.
States; $600,000 for matching State offerings
for cooperative water investigations; and
$650,000 to clear phreatophytie growth from
the Gila River, Arizona.
Amendment No. 14. Provides a totil of
$12,950,000 instead of $12,350,000 as proposed
by the House and 813,250,000 as proposed by
the Senate, to be available GM y for coopera-
tion with States or municipalities for water
resources investigations.
The conferees are in agreement that at
least $50,000 of this additional amount will
be made available by the Geological Survey
to match state funds in order to commence
10315
a hydrologic survey of the Deism ?sz,
Peninsula.
Bureau of Mines
Amendment No. 15. Appropriates $34,740.-
000 for conservation and development of
mineral resources instead of $31,540,000 as
proposed by the House and $34,940,000 as
proposed by the Senate. The net increase
consists of an increase of $3,500,000 for the
development of production technologies of
heavy metals which are in short supply in
the United States, and a decrease of $300,000
for the funding of a culm dump project HI
Pennsylvania.
Amendment No. 16. Appropriates $4,300,-
000 for solid waste disposal as proposed by
the Senate instead of $4,000,000 as proposed
by the House. The increase over the House
bill is for a demonstration culm dump pr,
ect in Pennsylvania.
Amendment No. 17. Appropriates $7,000,-
000 for Appalachian-Region mining area res-
toration as proposed by the Senate instead
of $8,000,000 as proposed by the House.
Bureau of Commercial Fisheries
Amendment No. 18. Appropriates $20,701,-
000 for management and investigations of re-
sources instead of $20,312,000 as proposed by
the House and $21,076,000 as proposed by the
Senate. The increase over the House bill in-
cludes: $90,000 for tail water research and
expansion of biological investigations on Mis-
souri River Reservoirs; and $249,000 for ex-
panded investigation, disappearance of mi-
grating fish, upper reaches of Columbia River
Basin; and $50,000 for expanded development
of the Pacific Hake Fishery program.
Amendment No. 19. Appropriates $2.675.-
000 for Anadromous and Great Lakes fisheries
conservation as proposed by the Senate, and
deletes language "to remain available until
expended".
Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife
Amendment No. 20. Appropriates $38,145,-
800 for management and investigations of re-
sources instead of $37,164,000 as proposal by
the House and $39,161,400 as proposed by the
Senate. The increase over the House lull
includes: Operation and Maintenance funds
for the following fish hatcheries-450,000,
Norfork, Arkansas; $27,000, Natchitoclies,
Louisiana; $136,500, Wytheville, Virginia;
$59,900, Lahonton, Nevada; $13,800, Gas ins
Point, South Dakota; and $10,500, Valley
City, North Dakota.
In addition, $40,000 for the establishment
of a cooperative fishery unit, University of
Washington; $40,000 for financing the co-
operative fishery units at Montana State Col-
lege, Colorado State University, Utah State
University, and the University of Missouri at
a $40,000 annual level; $16,000 for technical
fishery management assistance; Aberdeen
area, Bureau of Indian Affairs; $43,100 addi-
tional operating funds, Piedmont Wildlife
Refuge; $200,000 predatory animal control;
$200,000 studies on artificial fishing reefs;
$20,000 for the determination of a suitable
site for a trout hatchery in Kentucky; end
$125,000 for research on control of Poly-
nesian rats in Hawaii.
The conferees are in agreement that a re-
view and analysis of the funding for the
various cooperative wildlife research units
shall be made by the Department and that
the 1968 budget estimate shall provide uni-
form funding for these units at a level com-
mensurate with the needs.
Amendment No. 21. Appropriates $7,118,-
600 for construction instead of $5,130,000 es
proposed by the House and $8,341,600 as pro-
posed by the Senate. The increase providsti
over the House bill includes: $1,363,000 for
improvements and additions at the following
hatcheries?$115,000, Williams Creek, Ari-
zona; $334,000, Lahonton, Nevada; $190,000,
Valley City, North Dakota; $219,000, Creston,
Montana; $121,000, New London, Minnesota;
$95,000, Dexter, New Mexico; $224,000, Koos-
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
May .17, )966APproved For ,toemkiRRWR,IRETYiN5
6-7-BRoV0000400070009-2
10317
gram foretired members and members
of the uniformed services and their de-
pendents, I would, had I been present,
voted "aye."
On rollcall No. 97, to amend the Inter-
state Commerce Act to insure the ade-
quacy of the national railroad freight
car supply, I would have voted "aye."
On rollcall No. 98, on the passage of
the Foreign Agents Registration Act, I
would have voted "aye."
On rollcall No. 100, on the adoption of
the rule to consider HR. 14544, to pro-
mote private financing of credit needs
and to provide for an efficient and or-
derly method of liquidating financial as-
sets held by Federal credit agencies, I
would have voted "aye."
It is needless to say, that if I had been
in Washington during the time I was
officially excused, I would have answered
the quorum calls which are recorded in
rollcalls Nos. 88, 89, 90, 93, 95, 96,99, and
101.
(Mr. HELSTOSKI asked and was
given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
APPOINTMENT OF AN ADVISORY
COMMITTEE UNDER THE HIGH
SPEED GROUND TRANSPORTA-
TION RESEARCH AND DEVELOP-
MENT ACT
(Mr. PICKLE asked and was given
permission to address the House for 1
minute and to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. PICKLE. Mr. Speaker, the horse-
and-buggy pace the Department of
Commerce has followed in regard to the
appointment of an advisory committee,
as provided for under the High Speed
Ground Transportation Research and
Development Act, has led to what I be-
lieve to be a flagrant demonstration of
disregard and even disrespect for the
Congress.
As the result of testimony of Secretary
John T. Conner before the Subcommit-
tee on Transportation and Aeronautics,
of which I am a member, the Depart-
ment's commitment to the Pennsylvania
Railroad for the demonstration project
between Washington and New York City
would be limited to the purchase of
equipment and to the cost of certain
statistical studies, and that the com-
mitment of the railroad would be to all
other costs?including that pertaining
to track.
It is my understanding that currently
the Department is negotiating a con-
tract with the Pennsylvania for
$1,764,000 for improvement and mainte-
nance of test track in addition to the
contract which they have already en-
tered with the railroad for $9,600,000
for the operation of the demonstration
project.
Although last week I did receive a
copy of those persons who have been in-
vited to be on the committee, as far as
I know, there has been at this time no
actual appointment of the Advisory
Committee?a delay of more than 8
months since the bill's passage.
It appears to me at this time that
most of the contract funds and actual
plans for the demonstration program
have either been committed or agreed
upon?and without the advice of the
Advisory Committee, which was clearly
the intent of our subcommittee and that
of Congress.
The Department's actions, which
seem to be pointed variance with the
Intention of that expressed by the sub-
committee, I think would raise some
questions about the Department's in-
tentions at a time when a separate De-
partment of Transportation has been
recommended.
I am before you, today, so that you
may be informed of this matter, and to
alert you that I have asked for an in-
vestigation into the situation.
? CLEAN WATERS ACT OF 1966
(Mr. STALBAUM asked and was
given permission to address the House
for 1 minute and to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. STALBAUM. Mr. Speaker, I am
today introducing the Clean Waters Act
of 1966 which is designed to halt the
poisonous spread of pollution in Amer-
ica's principal waterways including the
Great Lakes system.
It is becoming increasingly apparent
that lower levels of government are un-
able to cope with this nationwide prob-
lem and the Federal Government must
demonstrate its responsibility by taking
Immediate steps to help them curb mu-
nicipal and industrial pollution.
My proposal would provide 90 percent
Federal financing instead of the 30 to
40 percent now available and allocate
$3 billion in funds to build sewage treat-
ment plants as the first step toward
halting the calamity now overwhelming
our precious natural resource?our riv-
ers and other waterway systems.
This bill would assist local communi-
ties in establishing a comprehensive pol-
lutipn control program with the assist-
ance of Federal experts. Approximately
92 percent Federal funds would be made
available to the communities who could
not otherwise join in the antipollution
battle.
House colleagues, particularly those
who come from areas bordering the
Great Lakes, are urged to join me in this
proposal.
IN TRYING TO SAVE THE OLD
OPERA HOUSE NEW YORK MAY
LOSE THE OPERA
(Mr. CELLER asked and was given
Permission to address the House for 1
minute.)
Mr. CELLER. Mr. Speaker, a citizens'
group has been formed in New York to
save the old Metropolitan Opera House.
By saving the building, however, they
may destroy opera in New York, thus
throwing the baby out with the bath.
The old building, according to the
Landmarks Commission, is not worth
saving.
The Metropolitan Opera has no en-
dowment. With the sale of the property
of the old house, the Metropolitan will
be assured about a half million dollars
each year for 50 years. This would go
far to make up any deficit which may
exist for Metropolitan when it performs
opera at the Lincoln Center for the
Performing Arts.
This citizens' group induced the Legis-
lature of the State of New York to pass
a bill to prevent the sale of the old
building. I hope that the Governor will
veto that bill.
As a devotee of the opera and a sub-
scriber for more than 40 years, I have
helped, with others, to pay the deficit
which has always existed in the opera
house. The Met cannot function at Lin-
coln Square without this $500,000 I have
just mentioned.
The old house cannot be renovated ex-
cept at a cost of $10 million. At best
it could not profitably be used. It prob-
ably would become an old movie house.
The Metropolitan, at the old house,
had great difficulty in renting it in off-
seasons; that is, between the various
opera seasons.
Many of the members of this citizens'
group never evinced the slightest interest
In opera before. Why this sudden urge?
Is it publicity?
I would say that some of the members
of this citizens' group would think Puc-
cini was the name of a spaghetti and
that Richard Wagner was a former base-
ball player.
RECOGNIZING WATERLOO, N.Y. AS
BIRTHPLACE OF MEMORIAL DAY
Mr. ROGERS of Colorado. Mr.
Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that
the Committee on the Judiciary be dis-
charged from further consideration of
House Concurrent Resolution 587, offi-
cially recognizing Waterloo, N.Y., as the
birthplace of Memorial Day, and author-
izing the President to issue an appro-
priate proclamation relating to the cen-
tennial anniversary of the first celebra-
tion of Memorial Day, and ask for its
immediate consideration. ?
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from
Colorado?
There was no objection.
The Clerk read the concurrent resolu-
tion, as follows:
H. CON. RES. 587
Whereas the United States will this year
celebrate the one hundredth anniversary of
the first observance of Memorial Day as a
national holiday to pay tribute to those who
gave their lives in all our Nation's wars; and
Whereas the people of the village of Water-
loo, New York, did proclaim and observe
May 5, 1866, as a special day for decorating
the graves of those who had lost their lives
in the Civil War and in honoring these dead;
and
Whereas the Village of Waterloo has each
year since then observed an annual holiday
for this same purpose; and
Whereas the historical records clearly show
that this observance in Waterloo, New York,
on May 5, 1866, represented the first formal
continuous, annual, public observance of
Memorial Day as a special annual holiday;
and
Whereas Memorial Day has since become a
national holiday, observed from one end of
the land to the other on May 30 each year
for the purpose of paying tribute to the
honored dead of all the wars and engage-
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
Approved For a8ima0s99/439 jael, 51 INfL671n8fACIR000400070009g
10318
//lents in which our Armed Forces have been
involved: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives
(the Senate concurring), That the Congress
oi the United States, in grateful recognition
oi the noble patriotic tradition set in motion
one hundred years ago in the village of
Waterloo, New York, does hereby officially
recognize Waterloo, New York, as the birth-
place of Memorial Day, and authorizes and
requests the President to issue, prior to May
;le, 1966, an appropriate proclamation call-
ing the attention of all citizens to the cen-
tennial anniversary of the first observance
of Memorial Day in Waterloo, New York.
AMENDS.) ENTS oFFERED By MR. ROGERS OF
COLORADO
Mr. ROGERS of Colorado. Mr.
Speaker, I offer two amendments and
ask unanimous consent that they be con-
sidered en bloc.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from
Colorado?
There was no objection.
The Clerk read the amendments, as
follows:
Amendments offered by Mr. ROGERS of
Colorado: On page 2, line 3, strike the word
"grateful"; and strike the word "noble".
Strike all "Whereas" clauses.
The amendments were agreed to.
The concurrent resolution was agreed
to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the
table.
ONE HUNDREDTH ANNIVERSARY OF
THE BIRTH OF MEMORIAL DAY,
AT WATERLOO, N.Y., MAY 5, 1866
Mr. STRATTON. Mr. Speaker, I am
delighted that House Concurrent Res-
olution 587, which I had the honor of
introducing on February 10, this year, to
give appropriate and proper recognition
to the 100th anniversary being celebrated
this year ot the great national holiday
of Memorial Day, has passed. I want to
express my appreciation, Mr. Speaker, to
the distinguished chairman of the sub-
committee, the gentleman from Colorado
[Mr. ROGERS I, for his leadership in bring-
ing this bill to the floor today, so that
this legislation might be enacted in time
For the annual Memorial Day observance
next weekend and also to the chairman
of the full committee, the gentleman
,from New York ( Mr. CELLER I.
This resolution pays well deserved rec-
ognition to the village of Waterloo, N.Y.,
located in Seneca County in my congres-
8ional district, as the official birthplace
of Memorial Day, and it authorizes the
'President to issue an appropriate proc-
lamation to that effect.
Memorial Day is one of our most im-
portant and respected national holidays.
Though it started after the Civil War as
an occasion for decorating the graves
and pausing to remember the sacrifices
of those who lost their lives specifically
in that war, both in the South and in the
North, Memorial Day has since come to
be recognized as an occasion for us to
pay tribute to all Americans who have
paid the supreme sacrifice for their
country in all the wars and engagements
in which we have participated, including
our present operation in Vietnam.
The observance of Memorial Day as a
public, annual holiday, set aside for this
solemn purpose, was begun 100 years ago
this year in Waterloo, N.Y., on May 5,
1866. Local citizens in other communi-
ties paused to decorate graves of service-
men killed in the Civil War is one or two
instances a week or so before the people
of Waterloo did. But, the records in the
Library of Congress clearly indicate that
the ceremony which took place in Water-
loo on May 5, 1866, was the first time any
community had set aside a day, to be
observed henceforth on an annual basis,
not only for decorating graves and pay-
ing tribute to the honored dead, but also
as a general, public holiday, specifically
set aside and designated for that pur-
pose.
It should be noted, Mr. Speaker, that
Waterloo's original Memorial Day ob-
servance occurred 2 years before Gen.
John A. Logan, first commander of the
Grand Army of the Republic, issued his
famous General Order No. 11 establish-
ing Memorial Day, or "Decoration Day"
as it was then known, on an official, con-
tinuing basis as far as the GAR u as con-
cerned. And it should also be noted that
the date of General Logan's famous or-
der was 2 years to the exact day, May 5,
from the original Waterloo observance
of Memorial Day. Subsequently, by
general agreement the Nation moved its
observance of the Holiday to May 30 in-
stead of May 5.
It is also interesting to note that New
York State was the first State to declare
Memorial Day, May 30, as a legal holi-
day, in 1873. And early this year the
New York State Legislature enacted leg-
islation designating Waterloo as the offi-
cial birthplace of Memorial Day and
Governor Rockefeller signed an appro-
priate proclamation to that effect on
March 7, 1966.
An account of the original Memorial
Day observance in the beautiful Finger
Lakes area of upstate New York is to be
found in the following memorandum pre-
pared by the Waterloo Memorial Day
Centennial Committee:
The fact that Waterloo held a Memorial
Day observance on May 5, 1866, is w 41 estab-
lished. Briefly, the story starts in 1865, when
Henry C. Welles, a local druggist, mentioned
at a social gathering that while praising the
living heroes of the war, it would t e well to
also remember the patriotic dead by deco-
rating their graves. In the spring of 1866,
he again mentioned this subject to General
John B. Murray, then Seneca Cour ty Clerk.
Murray, a man of action, quickly advanced
the thought and developed it. Plms were
formulated by a committee and it was decid-
ed to close all businesses and devote a day
to honoring the dead.
Townspeople adopted the idea wholeheart-
edly. Ladies of the village met at a local
hall and prepared wreathe, crosses ..and bou-
quets for each veteran's ,grave. The village
was decorated with flags at half mast, draped
with evergreen boughs and mourn; rig black
streamers.
Civic societies joined the procession to the
three then existing cemeteries, led by vet-
erans marching to the strains of martial
music. Impressive and lengthy services were
held at each cemetery, including speeches
by General Murray and a local clergyman.
No festivities broke the solemnity of the day.
On the same clay the following year (May 5,
1967)? these ceremonies were repeated. In
ax 17, .1966
1868, Waterloo joined with otherworrmuni-
ties in holding their observance orriN:...iv 30th.
It has been held annually on that diii since.
The formal, dignified manner in which
Waterloo observed their first Memorial Days
initiated the pattern for future Memorial
Day observances all over the nation.
Mr. Speaker, appropriate recognition
of the importance of this original observ-
ance is also to be found in a number of
articles from the historical record. For
example, the Denver Colorado Catholic
states the following:
The first public demonstration in decorat-
ing the graves of federal soldiers at the North,
took place at Waterloo, New York, the place
where Rev. L. A. Lambert, the efficient Chap-
lin of the 18th Ill. Volunteers, delivered the
excellent memorial address, printed on the
first page of this paper. The Nationel holi-
day known as Decoration Day, had its be-
ginning from this demonstration. We re-
member the occasion well. Although it wire
as early as the 30th (sic) of May, the heat
was oppressive and many persons were pros-
trated by it. The year was 1866, The ladies
prepared wreaths of flowers for the graves
of each and every fallen brave who was
buried in the town. The flags of the village
were at half mast, and business was entirely
suspended. All of the societies of the place
accompanied by all the other inhabitants
and numerous visitors from the surround-
ing country, preceded by a band of music,
marched to the three ceremonies where im-
pressive memorial ceremonies were per-
formed.
And the official journal of the Sons of
'Union Veterans of the Civil War, the
Banner for May 1933, contains the fol-
lowing item:
The morning of May 5, 1866, dawned clear
and beautiful in the little town of Waterloo,
New York. It was a morning that was to
see the beginning of a beautiful, sacred
and solemn custom, a practice that war;
eventually to become accepted and univer-
sally practiced by the American people. On
that pleasant morning General John B. Mur-
ray, then a resident of Waterloo, conceived
the idea of calling together a platoon of
ex-soldiers who had worn the Blue of the
Northland during the War of the Rebellion,
for the purpose of showing by their action,
their intense loyalty, their love and devo-
tion toward those of their comrades who had
answered the last roll call.
Visualize to yourself what a scene this
must have been. Flags floating proudly on
the balmy spring breeze, flowers piled in
great profusion; flowers that hal been
gathered by the school children precious to
this occasion; members of that large body
of soldiers who compressed the Union Army
during the War that only a year previous,
they had brought to a successful conclusion.
Standing at attention these soldiers re-
ceived perhaps from the hands of the school
children, these first blossoms of spring,.
Those men were in the prime of eir life,
and with heads erect, shoulders thrown back,
at the command of General Murray, marched
to the strains of martial music to the local
cemetery and proceeded to decorate the
graves of their departed comrades.
That morning, beautiful with tee first
blossoms of spring; the birds gaily singing;
the air sweet with the perfume of flowers;
the trees resplendent in their green foliage;
all nature seemed to be fitted for this sacred
duty. Even the Ruler of the Universe seemed
in accord with these Men in Blue; this God
of Love and Mercy who had carried them
safely through the strife and turmoil of war,
seemed to smile benignly down upon these
men in Blue, who with reverential respect,
With heads bowed with love and devotion,
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
Ap p rove d63Ntositmle3Rpfdp
Mcw 17: 1966 MORIto-RDAYNEV1021.46R000400070009-2 10297
The legislative clerk proceeded to call
the roll,
Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.
The question is on agreeing to the reso-
lution. The yeas and nays have been
ordered, and the clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. LONG of Louisiana. I announce
that the Senator from New Mexico [Mr.
ANDERSON], the Senator from Wisconsin
[Mr. NELsoN], the Senator from Oregon
[Mrs. NEUBERGER], the Senator from
Connecticut [Mr. RisicoFF], and the
Senator from New Jersey [Mr. WIL-
LIAMS], are absent on official business.
I also announce that the Senator from
Connecticut [Mr. Doprp], the Senator
from Illinois [Mr. DOUGLAS], the Senator
from Mississippi [Mr. EASTLAND] , the
Senator from Ohio [Mr. LAuscHE1 , the
Senator from Montana [Mr. MANSFIELD],
the Senator from Wyoming [Mr. Mc-
GEE], and the Senator from South Caro-
lina [Mr. RUSSELL], are necessarily ab-
sent.
I further announce that, if present and
voting, the Senator from New Mexico
[Mr. ANDERSON], the Senator from Con-
necticut [Mr. Dorm], the Senator from
Illinois [Mr. DOUGLAS], the Senator from
Ohio [Mr. LAUSCHE], the Senator from
Montana [Mr. MANSFIELD], the Senator
from Wyoming [Mr. McGEE], the Sena-
tor from Wisconsin [Mr. NELSON], the
Senator from Oregon [Mrs. NEUBERGER],
the Senator from Connecticut [Mr. RIBI-
coFF], the Senator from South Carolina
[Mr. RUSSELL], and the Senator from
New Jersey [Mr. WILLIAMS], would each
vote "yea."
Mr. KUCHEL. I announce that the
Senator from Illinois [Mr. DIRKSEN] is
absent because of illness.
The Senator from Nebraska [Mr.
HRUSKA], the Senator from Pennsylvania
[Mr. SCOTT], and the Senator from Texas
[Mr. TOWER] are necessarily absent.
If present and voting, the Senator
From Illinois [Mr. DIRKSEN], the Senator
from Nebraska [Mr. HrtusicA], the Sen-
ator from Pennsylvania [Mr. SCOTT], and
the Senator from Texas [Mr. TOWER]
would each vote "yea."
The result was announced?yeas 84,
nays 0, as follows:
[No. 76 Leg.]
YEAS-84
Aiken Fulbright McIntyre
Allott Gore Metcalf
Bartlett Griffin Miller
Bass Gruening Mondale
Bayh Harris Monroney
Bennett Hart Montoya
Bible Hartke Morse
Boggs Hayden Morton
Brewster Hickenlooper Moss
Burdick Hill Mundt
Byrd, Va. Holland Murphy
Byrd, W. Va. Inouye Muskie
Cannon Jackson Pastore
Carlson Javits Pearson
Case Jordan, N.C. Pell
Church Jordan, Idaho Prouty
Clark Kennedy, Mass. Proxmire
Cooper Kennedy, N.Y. Randolph
Cotton Kuchel Robertson
Curtis Long, Mo. Russell, Ga.
Dominick Long, La. Saltonstall
Ellender Magnuson Simpson
Ervin McCarthy Smothers
Fannin McClellan Smith
Fong McGovern Sparkman
Stennis
Symington.
Talmadge
Anderson
Dirksen
Dodd
Douglas
Eastland
Hruska
Thurmond
Tyding.s
Williams, Del.
NAYS-0
NOT VOTING-16
Yarborough
Young, N. Dak.
Young, Ohio
Lausehe
Mansfield
McGee
Nelson
Neuberger
Ribicoff
Russell, S.C.
Scott
Tower
Williams, N.J.
So the resolution (S. Res. 179) was
agreed to, as follows:
Resolved, That the Senate commends the
President's serious and urgent efforts to ne-
gotiate international agreements limiting the
spread of nuclear weapons and supports the
principle of additional efforts by the Presi-
dent which are appropriate and necessary in
the interest of peace for the solution of nu-
clear,proliferous problems.
Th preamble was agreed to.
HE ARROGANCE OF POWER
Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. President, on
May 5 Senator FULBRIGHT delivered the
third of the Christian A. Herter lectures
at the School of Advanced International
Studies at Johns Hopkins University, en-
titled "The Arrogance of Power." On
May 10 Senator FULBRIGHT addressed a
convocation sponsored by the Center for
Democratic Institutions at Los Angeles
on the subject "The University and
American Foreign Policy."
There has been a good deal of discus-
sion and of editorial comment about
these speeches. I am sure that. the Sen-
ator from Arkansas did not expect that
everyone would accept his analysis with-
out any reservations or all the applica-
tions of his views to contemporary for-
eign policy. I do believe that he has
raised a number of issues and questions
which deserve the kind of discussion and
debate necessary to have well informed
citizens in democratic government. In
one of his speeches Senator FULBRIGHT
stated:
I am not convinced that either the govern-
ment or the universities are making the
best possible use of their intellectual re-
sources to deal with the problems of war
and peace in the nuclear age.
The kind of critical challenges he has
been raising can be most helpful in mov-
ing us to make this intellectual effort.
I ask unanimous consent that these
speeches be printed at this point in the
RECORD. I also ask unanimous consent
that the article about Senator FULBRIGHT
which appeared in Life magazine in May
also be printed in the RECORD, since it
provides an insight into his scholarly
and reflective approach to problems and
to his character and convictions.
There being no objection, the speeches
and the article were ordered to be print-
ed in the RECORD, as follows:
THE UNIVERSITY AND AMERICAN FOREIGN
POLICY
(Speech given by Senator J. W. FULBRIGHT
on Tuesday, May 10, 1966, at a convocation
sponsored by the Center for Democratic
Institutions, Los Angeles, Calif.)
The prospect of death, which used to be a
matter for individual contemplation, has
become in our generation a problem for the
human race. The situation to which we
have come is not a unique one in nature;
other forms of life have been threatened
with extinction or become extinct when
they could not adapt to radical changes in
their environments. What is unique for
man is that the change of environment which
threatens his species was not the work of
mindless forces of nature but the result of,
his own creative genius. Unlike other for=
of life which have faced the danger of ex-
tinction, we have had some choice in the
matter, a fact which tells as much about
man's folly as it does about his inventive-
ness. Having chosen to create the condi-
tions for our own collective death, however,
we at least retain some choice about whether
it is actually going to happen.
It is hard to believe in the destruction of
the human race. Because we have managed
to avoid a holocaust since the invention of
nuclear weapons twenty years ago, the
danger of its occurrence now seems remote,
like Judgment Day, and references to it have
become so frequent and familiar as to lose
their meaning; the prospect of our disap-
pearance from the earth has become a cliche,
even something of a bore. It is a fine thing
of course that the hydrogen bomb hasn't
reduced us all to nervous wrecks, but it is
a fine thing that, finding the threat in-
credible, we act as though it did not exist
and go on conducting international relations
in the traditional manner, which is to say,
In a manner that does little if anything to
reduce the possibility of a catastrophe.
I am not convinced that either the govern-
ment or the universities are making the best
possible use of their intellectual resources
to deal with the problems of war and peace
in the nuclear age. Both seem by and large
to have accepted the idea that the avoidance
of nuclear war is a matter of skillful "crisis
management," as though the techniques of
diplomacy and deterrence which have gotten
us through the last twenty years have only
to be improved upon to get us through the
next twenty or a hundred or a thousand
years.
The law of averages has already been more
than kind to us and we have had some very
close calls, notably in October 1962. We es-
caped a nuclear war at the time of the Cuban
missile affair because of President Kennedy's
skillful "crisis management" and Premier
Khrushchev's prudent response to it; surely
we cannot count on the indefinite survival
of the human race if it must depend on an
Indefinite number of repetitions of that sort
of encounter. Sooner or later, the law of
averages will turn against us; an extremist
or incompetent will come to power in one
major country or another, or a misjudgment
will be made by some perfectly competent
official, or things will just get out of hand
without anyone being precisely responsible
as happened in 1914. None of us, however?
professors, bureaucrats or politicians?has
yet undertaken a serious and concerted ef-
fort to put the survival of our species on
some more solid foundation than an unend-
ing series of narrow escapes.
What we must do, in the words of Brock
Chisholm, a distinguished psychiatrist and
former Director-General of the World Health
Organization, is nothing less than "to re-
examine all of the attitudes of our ancestors
and to select from those attitudes things
which we, on our own authority in these
present circumstances, with our knowledge,
recognize as still valid in this new kind of
World."
I regret that I do not have a definite plan
for the execution of so considerable a proj-
ect, but I have an idea as to who must ac-
cept the principal responsibility for it:
clearly, the universities. I agree. with Dr.
Chisholm, who writes: "I think every uni-
versity has an obligation to consider whether
its teaching is in fact universal. Does it
open all possible channels of knowledge to
its students? Does it teach things in true
perspective to each other? Does it take the
same attitudes about other cultures as it
Approved For Release 2005/06/29: CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
Approved For Rele_ase 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
10298 (,ONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE May 17, 1VGG
sloes about the one which it happens to be
working"
Whatever the circumstances of the mo-
ments whatever the demands of government
and industry on the universities?and what-
ever the rewards for meeting these de-
mands?the highest function of higher edu-
cation is the "teaching of things in perspec-
tive," toward the purpose of enriching the
life of the individual arid advancing the
eternal effort to bring reason and justice and
humanity into the relations of men and na-
tions. Toward these ends, the university has
a responsibility to analyze existing public
policies with a view to determining whether
they advance or retard the realization of
basic human objectives and whether and
how they should be changed.
Obviously, there are great mutual bene-
nts in relations between the universities
and government, but when the relationship
becomes too close. too extensive and too
highly valued by the universities, the higher
functions of the university are in danger
of being compromised. The danger goes far
beyond contractual associations with the
CIA, which, unfortunate though they are,
are so egregious that, once they are known,
there is a tendency to terminate them with
all possible haste. Nor is there any dan-
ger inherent in government sponsored re-
search of and by itself; on the contrary, gov-
ernment contracts bring needed money to
the universities and needed intellectual re-
sources to the government. The danger lies
rather in the extent of these connections:
as long as they are secondary functions for
the university, they are not harmful, but
when they become primary areas of activity,
when they become the major source of the
university's revenue and the major source
of the scholar's prestige, then the "teaching
of things in perspective" is likely to be
neglected and the universality of the uni-
versity compromised. The harm, in short,
lies less in what is done in relation to the
government but in what is neglected as a
result of it.
Not having been a professor for some
years. IC must make it clear that I am ex-
pressing strong suspicions rather than firm
convictions about the effects of govern-
ment on the universities. I suspect that
when a -university becomes very closely ori-
ented to the current needs of government,
it takes on. some of the atmosphere of a place
of business while losing that of a place of
learning. The sciences, I would expect, are
emphasized at th expense et' the humanities
and, within the humanities, the behavioral
achool of sorted science at the expense of
the mom traditional?and to my mind more
humane?approaches. Generally, I would
expect an interest in, salable information
pertaining to current problems to be em-
phasized at the expense of general ideas
pertaining to the human condition.
In such an atmosphere, there oan be little
room for intellectual in whose
Interest is in making a contribution to the
81.M1 of human knowledge without regard to
its immediate uses. The kind of professor
needed in the government-oriented univer-
sity, is one, I suspect, who, though techni-
cally brilliant, is philosophically orthodox,
because the true dissenter, the man who dis-
sents about immense and not jest technique,,
is likely to lose a sale.
"Sound" scholars produce "sound" disci-
ples. In a research-oriented university, I
would expect, the student who is highly
valued is the one who can contribute to pro-
duction. Obviously, the graduate student is
a more valuable research assistant than the
undergraduate and the scientifically-orient-
cd student is more valuable than the one
who is interested in history or philosophy.
The latter, Indeed, is likely to find himself
relegated to the charge of the lower echelon
of the faculty, those, that is, who are con-
demned to teach,
In lending themselves too inuch to the
purposes of government, the universities are
failing their higher purposes. They are not
contributing to the re-examination of the
ideas of our ancestors on which human sur-
vival depends; they are not den hog with the
central problems of the first vTneration in
human, history which holds the power of
life and death over its progeny; they are not,
in Archibald MaeLeleh's phrase, trying to
produce "an idea that mankind can hold to."
How might some of these considerations
guide the universities toward a constructive
contribution in the current crisis of our for-
eign relations?
I most emphatically do not think that the
universities should act like recruits called to
the colors. I do not think that the humani-
ties must now give way to military science,
that civil engineering must give away to
military engineering, or that history and
philosophy must give way to computerized
"war games."
Unless it conceives itself as Lathing more
than the servant of the party it power, the
university has a higher function to per-
form. The university, it is true, cannot
separate itself from the society of which it
is a part, but the community of scholars
must do more than accept misfortune and
consider how it can be overcome. It must
ask how we came to misfortune end whether
we need have. It must ask what has been
done wisely and what has be-en thine foolishly
and whet the answers to theee questions
imply for the future. It must ask how it
Caine about that we have had for no long to
devote so great a part of our resources to war
and its prevention and it must f sk whether
we are condemned by forces beyoad our con-
trol to continue to do so. It cin, like the
Secretary of State, ask what is wrong with
the "other side," but it must no fail to ask
az wellwhat is wrong with our side, remem-
bering always that the highest cevotion we
can give is not to our country a it is but
to a concept of what we would Ike it to be.
In considering a crisis such as the war in
Vietnam, the politician is timidly preoc-
cupied with technique rather than long-term
needs. His concern is largely fern rued on the
tactical questions of the war: Weat are the
probable effects of bombing or of not bomb-
ing North Vietnam? What degree of escala-
tion is likely to bring the Chine, a into the
war? What concessions, if any, are likely to
induce the enemy to negotiate?
The scholar, on the other hard, in con-
sidering the war, must provide the historical
and philosophical foundistions on which wise
political decisions can be based. His proper
concern is with questions of mean: and ends,
of motive and purpose: To what, extent is
the war in Vietnam a civil war, to what ex-
tent a war of international aggression, to
what extent a conflict of ideologees? Does
the American military intervention in Viet-
nam strengthen our alliances throughout the
world, as the Administration belies:ee, or does
it weaken them, as General de Gaulle's state-
ment of lest winter would seem to indicate?
And perhaps the most Important questions
of all: does this war advance the freedom of
southeast Asia or make a mockery of it by
subjecting the region to great power domi-
nation? does it increase the security of the
United States by proving our resoive or re-
duce it by dra.ining our material end moral
resources?
Beyond the services to be performed in
connection with the war in Vietnam or with
any other single issue or crisis is the broader
responsibility to deal with the fundamental
questions of war and peace and their roots in
human nature. When an is said and done,
when the abstractions and subtleties of po-
litical science have been exhausted, there
remain the most basic unanswered cuestions
about war and peace and why we contest the
issues we contest and why we even care about
them. As Aldous Huxley has written : "There
may be arguments about the best way of
raising wheat in a cold climate or of re-
foresting a denuded mountain. But :such
arguments never lead to organized slaughter.
Organized slaughter is the result of argu-
ments about such questions as tile followmg:
Which is the best nation? The best religion?
The best political theory? The best form of
government? Why are other people so stupid
and wicked? Why can't they sae how good
and intelligent we are? Why do they resist
our beneficent efforts to bring them ux der
our control and make them like ourselves?"
Many of the wars fought by man? I am
tempted to say most?have been fought, c ver
such abstractions. The more I puzzle ever
the great wars of history, the more I am in-
clined to the view that the causes attributed
to them?territory, Markets, resources, the
defense or perpetuation of great principles--
were not the root causes at all but rather ex-
planations or excuses for certain unfathoma-
ble drives of human nature.
Why is it scholars should be :raking that
nations seem to have to prove that they are
bigger, better or stronger than other nations.
Why is it they should be asking that implicit
In this drive is the assumption tie I, the proof
of superiority is force?that when a nation
shows that it has the stronger army it is also
proving that it has better people, Letter insti-
tutions, better principles?and, general, a
better civilization. Why is it they should be
asking that so great a part of our* organized
efforts as societies is directed toward abet-sect
and mystic goals?toward propegating in
ideology, toward enhancing the pride and
power and self-esteem of the nation, as if the
nation had a "self" and a "soul" apart friths
the individuals who compose it, and as if the
wishes of individual men, for life and homi-
ness and prosperity, were selfish, tishonor 1-
ble and unworthy of our best creative effuses.
It is a curious thing that in an era when
interdisciplinary studies are favored in the
universities little, so far as I know, has bran
done to apply the insights of individual, and
social psychology to the study or' interna-
tional relations.
It would be interesting?to raise one of
many possible questions?to see what could
be learned about the psychological roots of
ideology: to what extent are ideological be-
liefs the result of a valid and disinterested
intellectual process and to what extent, to
they instilled in us by conclitio.niug or the
accident of birth? Or, to put the question
another way, why exactly is it that most
young Russians grow up believing in com-
munism and most young American.; grow no
believing in democracy or, for that matter,
what accounts for the coincidence that most
Arabs believe in Islam and most Spaniarcle
In Catholicism? What, in short, h, the real
source of ideological beliefs and what value
do they have as concepts of reality, much ler;
as principles for which men should be willing
to fight and die? I am intrigued, for exam-
ple, by the question of what Barry Coldwatei
would be saying and doing tcday if he hail
been born in Moscow or Peking instead of
Arizona.
I recently had the privilege of a luncheon
with the distinguished Johns Hopkins psy-
chiatrist, Dr. Jerome Prank, and he ex-
plained to me some psychiatric principles
which may be pertinent to a better under-
standing of international relations. He
pointed out, for example, that an ideology
gives us an identity beyond our own trivial
and transitory lives on earth and also serves
the purpose of "organizing the world" for
us, giving us a picture, though me; neeee-
sarily an accurate picture, of reality. A per-
son's worldview, or ideology, says Dr. Prank,
filters the signals that come to him, giving
meaning and pattern to otherwise odd bite
of information. Thus, for example, when a
Chinese and an American put radically dif-
ferent interpretations on the Vienamase war,
It is not necessarily because one or the other
has chosen to propound a wicked lie but
rather because each has filtered information
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
Approved Fratengs2M/REVE6*-131:2_
PRIN*14L6R000400070009-2 10299
Mdy 17,1966
from the real world through his ideological
worldview, selecting the parts that fit, re-
jecting the parts that do not, and coming
out with two radicailly different interpre-
tations of the same events. Even in this
country, which we consider relatively homo-
geneous, it is interesting that the war that
began in 1861 was referred to in Massa-
chusetts as the "rebellion of the Southern
States," in Pennsylvania as the "Civil War,"
in Virginia as the "war between the states,"
and in Texas as the "war to repel Yankee
aggression."
I think that the universities could prof-
itably pursue these basic questions of human
motivation and differences in perspective.
Another area that might be explored is that
of the relationship between a nation's foreign
and domestic concerns. My own feeling is
that an excessive preoccupation with foreign
relations over a long period of time is a
problem of great importance because it di-
verts a nation from the sources of its
strength, which are in its domestic life. A
nation immersed in foreign affairs is expend-
ing its capital, human as well as material;
sooner or later that capital must be renewed
by some diversion of creative energies from
foreign to domestic pursuits. I would doubt
that any nation has achieved a durable
greatness by conducting a "strong" foreign
policy, but many have been ruined by ex-
pending their energies on foreign adventures
while allowing their domestic bases to de-
teriorate. The United States emerged as a
world power in the twentieth century not
because of what it had done in-foreign rela-
tions but because it had spent the nine-
teenth century developing the North Amer-
ican continent; by contrast, the Austrian
and Turkish empires collapsed in the twen-
tieth century in large part because they had
for so long neglected their internal de-
velopment and organization. As one stu-
dent of politics, I would be grateful for aca-
demic enlightenment on this basic question
as to the sources of a community's strength.
Our prospects for peace and for the sur-
vival of our species depend in great part on
our ability to apply the kinds of insight and
understanding that only broadly based
liberal education can provide. We must
bring to our efforts for peace some of the
perspectives of history and philosophy and
psychology. We must apply the experience
of the past with intelligence and discrimina-
tion, separating those experiences which
seem to have general application from those
which are unique or accidental. We must
recognize that history can be misleading as
well as instructive, and we must avoid the
pitfall of simple and literal analogy?such as
the eternally repeated example of Munich,
which is so often cited as an object lesson
for cases which it resembles only slightly or
superficially. We must utilize our knowl-
edge of man and his past in the only way it
can be utilized, not as a source of detailed
prescriptions for specific maladies but as a
source of general insight into the kinds of
efforts that are likely to succeed and the
kinds that are likely to fail, the kinds of
policies that are likely to increase the pos-
sibility of human survival and the kinds that
are likely to reduce that possibility.
We must be prepared to examine each
situation and each problem on its merits
and we must be prepared, as only educated
men can be, to discard old myths in the
light of new realities. More important than
any single policy decision that we might
make is the strengthening of our capacity to
reconsider established policies in the light of
changing facts and circumstances. It is not
so much change itself that the universities
can usefully encourage as the capacity for
change. Even in the case of those of our
present policies which are perfectly sound,
it is not at all certain that we would be
prepared to alter these policies quickly in
response to a wholly new situation or an un-
foreseen opportunity. One of the basic
problems of our policy is thus intellectual
rather than political. It is the problem of
freeing our minds from the dead weight of
habit and prejudice and sterotype and of
bringing to bear on foreign policy the rich
and diverse resources of liberally educated
Men.
While the relationship between the execu-
tive agencies of the federal government and
the universities has become stiflingly close,
Congress and the community of scholars
have seldom been on intimate terms and
have often regarded each other with open
disdain. In recent months the Senate For-
eign Relations Commitee has been engaged
In an experiment designed to correct that
long estrangement. Inspired as -we have been
by President Johnson's policy of "building
bridges" to eastern Europe, we have under-
taken to build a few bridges between the
Senate and the universities.
With results thus far that seem to me
highly satisfactory, the Committe has made
itself available as a forum for the meeting of
politicians and professors and, more broadly,
as a forum through which recognized ex-
perts and scholars could contribute to Con-
gressional and public understanding of the
problems associated with the American in-
volvement in Vietnam and relations with
Communist China. We expect in the near
future to hold hearings on the Atlantic Al-
liance and it is my hope that in coming
months and years the Committee will con-
tinue to invite professors and scholars to
join with it in periodic programs of public
education.
I believe that a rewarding relationship can
be built between the Congress and the uni-
versities without either losing sight of its
principal responsibility?that of the Con-
gress to represent and of the universities to
educate. Valuable though the academic re-
lationship can be to politicians, who have
little time but great need for the insights of
history, philosophy, psychology and the other
disciplines, the education of politicians must
obviously be no more than an avocation to
those whose principal responsibility is in the
classroom.
If there is any one place to which we
are entitled to look for the wisdom which
may save our generation and future genera-
tions from the consequences of man's crea-
tive genius, that place is the university. To
a certain degree a United States Senator can
point the way toward intelligent and crea-
tive policies as he sees them; to a much
greater degree the President of the United
States can do so; but the ultimate answer
to the challenge of survival lies with the
scholars whose business it is to re-examine
the attitudes of our ancestors and, on the
basis Of that examination, to generate an
"Idea that mankind can hold to."
THE ARROGANCE OF POWER
(Statement by Senator J. W. FULDRIGHT,
chairman, Committee on Foreign Rela-
tions, U.S. Senate, at the Christian A.
Herter Lectures?lecture III, Johns Hop-
kins University, School of Advanced Inter-
national Studies, Washington, D.C., May
5, 1966)
America is the most fortunate of nations?
fortunate In its rich territory, fortunate in
having had a century of relative peace in
which to develop that territory, fortunate in
its diverse and talented population, fortunate
in the institutions devised by the founding
fathers and in the wisdom of those who have
adapted those institutions to a changing
world.
For the most part America has made good
use of its blessings, especially in its internal
life but also in its foreign relations. Having
done so much and succeeded so well, America
is now at that historical point at which a
great nation is in danger of losing its per-
spective on what exactly is within the realm
of its power and what is beyond it. Other
great nations, reaching this critical juncture,
have aspired to too much and, by over exten-
sion of effort, have declined and then fallen.
I do not think for a moment that America,
with its deeply rooted democratic traditions,
is likely to embark upon a campaign to
dominate the world in the manner of a Hitle/
or Napoleon. What I do fear is that it may
be drifting into commitments which, though
generous and benevolent in intent, are so
universal as to exceed even America's great
capacities. At the same time, it is my hope?
and I repeat it here because it is the major
point that I wish to convey in these
lectures?that America will escape those fatal
temptations of power which have ruined
other great nations and will instead do only
that good in the world which it can do, both
by direct effort and by the force of its own
example.
The stakes are high indeed: they include
not only America's continued greatness but
nothing less than the survival of the human
race in an ear when, for the first time in
human history, one generation has the power
of veto over the survival of the next.
In the seventeenth century a distinguished
Frenchman, Jean de la Bruyere, asked a ques-
tion that remains one of the profound para-
doxes of men and nations. "How," he asked,
"does if serve the people and add to their
happiness if their ruler extend his empire
by annexing the provinces of his enemies,
. . . how does it help me or my country-
men that my country be successful and cov-
ered with glory, that my country be power-
ful and dreaded, if, sad and worried, I live
in oppression and poverty." ,
The question, phrased somewhat differ-
ently, is how and why it happens that the
groups into which men organize themselves
come to be regarded as ends in themselves,
as living organisms with needs and prefer-
ences of their own which are separate from
and superior to those of the individual, war-
ranting, when necessary, the sacrifice of the
hopes, the pleasures and the lives of individ-
ual men. It is a paradox of politics that so
great a part of our organized efforts as
societies is directed toward abstract and
mystic goals?toward propagating an ideol-
ogy, toward enhancing the pride and power
and self-esteem of the nation, as if the
nation had a "self" and a "soul" apart from
the individuals who compose it, and as if
the wishes of individual men, for life and
happiness and prosperity, were selfish, dis-
honorable and unworthy of our best creative
efforts.
When all is said and done, when the ab-
stractions and subleties of political science
have been exhausted, there remain the most
basic unanswered questions about war and
peace and why we contest the issues we con-
test and why we even care about them. As
Aldous Huxley has written: "There may be
arguments about the best way of raising
wheat in a cold climate or of re-afforesting
a denuded mountain. But such arguments
never lead to organized slaughter. Or-
ganized slaughter is the result of arguments
about such questions as the following:
Which is the best nation? The best religion?
The best political theory? The best form
of government? Why are other people so
stupid and wicked? Why can't they see how
good and intelligent we are? Why do they
resist our beneficent efforts to bring them
under our control and make them like our-
selves?" 2
1 Jean de la Bruyere, French writer and
historian, in "Du Souverain ou de la Repub-
lique," in Ouvres Completes, Julian Benda,
ed. (Paris: Libraire Gallimard, 1951), Bib-
liotheque de al Pleiade, Vol. 23, pp. 302-303.
2 Aldous Huxley "The Politics of Ecology,"
(Santa Barbara: Center for the Study of
Democratic Institutions, 1963) p. 6.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29: CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
10300 Approved ForReiwipmex2h gwr9713Malipp "ay
0400070009-2
M .77, 1 6 6
Many of the wars fought by man?I am
tempted to say most?have been fought over
such abstractions. The more I puzzle over
the great wars of history, the more I am in-
clined to the view that the onuses attributed
to them?territory, markets, resources, the
defense or perpetuation of great principles--
were not the root causes at all but rather
explanations or excuses for certain unfath-
omable drives of human nature. For lack of
a clear and precise understanding of exactly
what these motives are, I refer to them as
the "arrogance of power"?as a psychological
need that nations seem to have to prove that
they are bigger, better or stronger than other
nations. Implicit in this drive is the as-
sum.ption that the proof of superiority is
force?that when a nation shows that it has
the stronger army it is also proving that it
has better people, better institutions, better
principles?and, in general, a better civiliza-
tion.
The evidence for my proposition is the
remarkable discrepancy between .the appar-
ent and hidden causes of some modern wars
and the discrepancy between their causes
and ultimate consequences.
The precipitating cause of the Franco-
Prussian war, for example, was a dispute
over the succession to the Spanish throne
and the ostensible "underlying" cause was
French resistance to the unification of Ger-
many. The war was followed by German.
unification?which probably could have been
achieved without war?but it was also fol-
lowed by the loss of Alsace-Lorraine, the,
humiliation of France and the emergence
of Germany as the greatest power in Europe,
which could not have been achieved without
war. The peace treaty, incidentally, said
nothing about the Spanish throne, which
everyone apparently had forgotten. One
wonders to what extent the Germans were
motivated simply by the desire to cut those
haughty Frenchmen down to size and have
a good excuse to build another monument in
Berlin.
The United States went to war in 1898
for the stated purpose of liberating Cuba
from Spanish tyranny, but then, after win-
ning the war?a war which Spain had been
willing to pay a high price to avoid?the
United States brought the liberated Cubans
under an American protectorate, and inci-
dentally annexed the Philippines, because,
according to President McKinley, the Lord
told him it was America's duty "to educate
the Filipinos, and uplift and civilize and
Christianize them, and by God's grace do the
very best we could by them, as our fellow-
men for whom Christ also died." 3
Isn't it interesting that the voice was the
voice of God but the words were those of
Theodore Roosevelt, Henry Cabot Lodge, Ad-
miral Mahan. those "imperialists of 1898"
who wanted America to have an empire just
because a big, powerful country like the
United States ought to have an empire?
The spirit of the times was expressed by Al-
bert Beveridge who proclaimed Americans to
be "a conquering race." "We must obey our
blood and occupy new markets and if neces-
sary new lands." he said, because "In the Al-
mighty's infinite plan . . . debased civiliza-
tions and decaying races" 'must disappear
"before the higher civilization of the nobler
and more virile types of man.."
In 1914 all Europe went to war, ostensibly
because the heir to the Austrian throne had
been assassinated at Sarajevo but really be-
cause that murder became the symbolic focus
of the incredibly delicate sensibilities of the
great nations of Europe. The events of the
summer of 1914 were a melodrama of ab-
"Samuel Flagg Bemis, A Diplomatic His-
tory of the United States (New York: Henry
ffolt and Company, 1955) p. 472.
4 Quoted in Barbara Tuchman, The Proud
Tower (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1966),
p. 153.
normal psychology: Austria had to humili-
ate Serbia in order not to be humiliated her-
self, but Austria's effort to recover self-
esteem was profoundly humiliating to Russia,
Russia was allied to France, who had been
feeling generally humiliated since 1871, and
Austria in turn was allied to Germany, whose
pride required. her to support Austria no mat-
ter how insanely Austria behaved and who
may in any case have felt that it would be
fun to give the German Army another swing
down the Champs Elysees. For these en-
nobling reasons the world was plunged Into
a war Which took tens of millions of lives,
precipitated the Russian Revolution and set
In motion the events that led to another
world war, a war which took tens of millions
more lives and precipitated the world wide
revolutions of which we spoke last week,
revolutions whose consequences are beyond
the foresight of any of us now alive.
Both the causes and consequences of war
may have more to do with pathology than
with politics, more to do with irrational
pressures of pride and pain than with ra-
tional calculations of advantage and profit.
It has been said that buried in the secret
soul of every woman is a drum majorette;
It might also be said that there is a bit of
the missionary in all of our souls. We all
like telling people what to do but unfor-
tunately they usually don't appreciate it. I
myself have given my wife some splendid
suggestions on household management but
she is so ungrateful for my advice that I have
stopped offering it. The phenomenon is ex-
plained by the Canadian psychiatrist and
former Director-General e t the World Health
Organization :Brock Chisholm, who writes:
". . Man's method of dealing with diffi-
culties in the past has always been to tell
everyone else how they should behave.
We've all been doing that for centuries.
"It should be clear by now that this no
longer does any good. Everybody has by
now been told by everybody else how he
should behave; The criticism is not effective;
it never has been, and it never is going to
be. . . .""
Ineffective though it has been, the giving?
and enforcement?of all this unsolicited ad-
vice has at least until recently been com-
patible with the survival of the human race.
Man is now, however, for the first time, in a
situation in which the survival of his species
Is in jeopardy. Other forms of life have been
endangered, and many destroyed, by changes
In their natural environment; man is men-
aced by a change of environment which he
himself has wrought by the invention of
nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles. Our
power to kill has become universal, creating
a radically new situation which, if we are
to survive, requires us to adopt some radi-
cally new attitudes about the giving and
enforcement of advice and in general about
human and international relations.
The enormity of the danger of extinction
of our species is dulled by the frequency with
which it is stated, as if a familiar threat of
catastrophe were no threat at all. We seem
to feel somehow that because the hydrogen
bomb has not killed as yet it it never going
to kill us. This is a dangerous assumption
because it encourages the retention of tradi-
tional attitudes about world politics when
our responsibility, in Dr. Chisholm's words,
is nothing less than "to re-examine all of the
attitudes of our ancestors and to select from
those attitudes things which we, on our own
authority in these present circumstances,
with our knowledge, recognize as still valid
in this new kind of world. . . .".
The attitude above all others which I feel
sure is no longer valid IQ the arrogance of
power, the tendency of great nations to
Brock Chisholm, Prescription for Survival,
(New York: Columbia University Press,
1957), p. 54.
a Ibid., p. 9.
equate power with virtue and major responsi-
bilities with a universal mission. The di-
lemmas involved are preeminently American
dilemmas, not because America has weak-
nesses that others do not have but because
America is powerful as no nation has ever
been before and the discrepancy between its
power and the power of others appears to be
increasing. I said in a speech in New Voris
last week that I felt confident that America,
with its great resources and democratic tra-
ditions, with its diverse and creative populas
tion, would find the wisdom to match it::
power. Perhaps I should have been more
cautious and expressed only hope instead of
confidence, because the wisdom that is re-
quired is greater wisdom than any great na-
tion has ever shown before. It must be
rooted, as Dr. Chisholm says, in the reexami-
nation of "all of the attitudes of our an-
cestors."
It is a tall order. Perhaps one can begin to
fill it by an attempt to assess some of the
effects of America's great power, on some ol
the small countries whom we have tried tc
help.
Reflecting on his voyages to Polynesia in
the late eighteenth century, Captain Cook
later wrote that "It would have been better
for these people never to have known us."
In a recently published book on European
explorations of the South Pacific, Alan
Moorehead relates how the Tahitians and the
gentle aborigines of Australia were corrupted
by the white man's diseases, alcohol, firearms,
laws and concepts of morality, by what
Moorehead calls "the long down-slide into
Western civilization." The first mission-
aries to Tahiti, says Moorehead, were "deter-
mined to recreate the island in the image of
lower-middle-class Protestant England * ?
They kept hammering away at the Tahitian
way of life until it crumbled before them,
and within two decades they had achieved
precisely what they set out to do." It is said
that the first missionaries who wena to Ha-
waii went for the purpose of explaining to
the Polynesians that it was sinful to work on
Sunday, only to discover that in those boun-
tiful islands nobody worked on any day.
Even when acting with the best of inten-
tions, Americans, like other Western peoples
who have carried their civilization abroad,
have had something of the same -fatal im-
pact" on smaller nations that European ex-
plorers had on the Tahitians and the native
Australians. We have not harmed people
because we wished to; on the contrary, more
often than not we have wanted to help peo-
ple and, in some very important respects, we
have helped them. Americans have brought
medicine and education, manufactures and
modern techniques to many places in the
world; but they also brought themselves and
the condescending attitudes of a people
whose very success breeds disdain for other
cultures. Bringing power without under-
standing, Americans as well as Europea:ns
have had a devastating effect in less ad-
vanced areas of the world; without wishing
to, without knowing they were doing it, they
have shattered traditional societies, dis-
rupted fragile economies, and undermined
peoples' confidence in themselves by the in-
vidious example of their own efficiency.
They have done this in many instances sim-
ply by being big and strong, by giving good
advice, by intruding on people who have not
wanted them but could not resist them.
Have you ever noticed how Americans act
when they go to foreign countries? For-
eigners frequently comment on the csmtrast
between the behavior of Americans at home
and abroad; in our own country, they say,
we are hospitable and considerate, but as
soon as we get outside our own borders some-
thing seems to get into us and, wherever we
are, we become noisy and demanding and
Alan Moorehead, The Fatal Impact (New
York: Harper and Row, 1966).
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
mhy 17, 1966 Approved FotialimitORSisiV9kRWF_17sEFRA4161R000400070009-2
strut around as if we owned the place. The
British used to say during the war that the
trouble with the Yanks was that they were
"overpaid, oversexed and over here." I re-
cently took a vacation In Mexico and noticed
in a small-town airport two groups of stu-
dents on holiday, both about undergraduate
age; one group was Japanese, the other
American. The Japanese were neatly dressed
and were talking and laughing in a manner
that neither annoyed anybody nor particu-
larly called attention to themselves. The
Americans, on the other hand, were disport-
ing themselves in a conspicuous and offen-
sive manner, stamping around the waiting
room in sloppy clothes, drinking beer and
shouting to each other as if no one else were
there.
This kind of scene, unfortunately, has be-
come familiar in many parts of the world.
I do not wish to exaggerate its significance;
but I have the feeling that, just as there
was once something special about being a
Roman or - a Spaniard or an Englishman,
there is now something about the conscious-
ness of being an American abroad, something
about the consciousness of belonging to the
biggest, richest country in the world, that
encourages people who are perfectly well
behaved at home to become boorish when
they are in somebody else's country and to
treaty the local citizens as if they weren't
really there. One reason why Americans
abroad may act as though they "own the
place" is that in many places they very
nearly do: American companies may domi-
nate large segments of a country's economy;
American products are advertised on bill-
boards and displayed in the shop windows;
American hotels and snack bars are avail-
able to protect American tourists from for-
eign influence, American soldiers may be
stationed in the country and, even if they
are not, the population are probably well
aware that their very survival depends on
the wisdom with which America uses her
immense military power.
I think that any American, when he goes
abroad, carries an unconscious knowledge
of all this power with him and it affects his
behavior just as it once affected the behavior
of Greeks and Romans, of Spaniards, Ger-
mans and Englishmen, in the brief high
noons of their respective ascendancies. It
was the arrogance of their power that led
nineteenth century Englishmen to suppose
that if you shouted at a foreigner loud
enough in English he was bound to under-
stand you, or that now leads Americans to
behave like Mark Twain's "innocents abroad,"
who reported as follows on their travels in
Europe:
"The peoples of those foreign countries
are very ignorant. They looked curiously at
the costumes that we had brought from the
wilds of America. They observed that we
talked loudly at table sometimes . In Paris,
they just simply opened their eyes and stared
when we spoke to them in French! We
never did succeed in making these idiots un-
derstand their own language.",
We all, as Dr. Chisholm explains, enjoy
telling people how they should behave, and
the bigger and stronger and richer we are,
the more we feel suited to the task, the more
indeed we consider it our duty. Dr. Chis-
holm relates the story of an eminent cleric
who had been proselyting the Eskimos and
said: "You know, for years we couldn't do
anything with those Eskimos at all; they
didn't have any sin. We had to teach them
sin for years before we could do anything
with them." I am reminded of the three
boy scouts who reported to their scoutmaster
that as their good deed for the day they had
helped an old lady cross the street. "That's
B Mark Twain, The Innocents Abroad (New
York: The Thistle Press, 1962) p. 494.
?Brock Chisholm, Prescription for Survival,
ibid, pp. 55-56.
fine," said the scoutmaster, "but why did it
take three of you?" "Well," they explained,
"she didn't want to go."
The good deed above all others that Amer-
icans feel qualified to perform is the teach-
ing of democracy and the dignity of man.
Let us consider the results of some American
good deeds in various parts of the world.
Over the years since President Monroe
proclaimed his doctrine, Latin Americans
have had the advantages of United States
tutelage in fiscal responsibility, in collective
security and in the techniques of democracy.
If they have fallen short in any of these
fields, the thought presents itself that the
fault may lie as much with the teacher as
with the pupils.
When President Theodore Roosevelt an-
nounced his "corollary" to the Monroe Doc-
trine in 1905, he solemnly declared that he
regarded the future interventions thus sanc-
tified as a "burden" and a "responsibility"
and an obligation to "international equity."
Not once, so far as I know, has the United
States regarded itself as intervening in a
Latin American country for selfish or un-
worthy motives?a view not necessarily
shared by the beneficiaries. Whatever re-
assurance the purity of our motives may give
must be shaken a little by the thought that
probably no country in all human history
has ever intervened in another except for
what it regarded as excellent motives. "The
wicked are wicked, no doubt," wrote Thack-
ery, "and they go astray and they fall, and
they come by their deserts; but who can tell
the mischief which the very virtuous do?" "
For all our noble intentions, the countries
which have had most of the tutelage in de-
mocracy by United States Marines are not
particularly democratic. These include
Haiti, which is under a brutal and super-
stitious dictatorship, the Dominican Repub-
lic, which is in turmoil, and Cuba, which, as
no one needs to be reminded, has replaced
its traditional right wing dictatorships with
a communist dictatorship.
Maybe, in the light of this extraordinary
record of accomplishment, it is time for us
to reconsider our teaching methods. Maybe
we are not really cut out for the job of
spreading the gospel of democracy. Maybe
it would profit us to concentrate on our own
democracy instead of trying to inflict our
particular version of it on all those ungrate-
ful Latin Americans who stubbornly oppose
their North American benefactors instead of
the "real" enemies whom we have so gra-
ciously chosen for them. And maybe?just
maybe?if we left our neighbors to make
their own judgments and their own mis-
takes, and confined our assistance to matters
of economics and technology instead of
philosophy, maybe then they would begin to
find the democracy and the dignity that
have largely eluded them and we in turn
might begin to find the love and gratitude
that we seem to crave.
Korea is another example. We went to
war in 1950 to defend South Korea against
the Russian-inspired aggression of North
Korea. I think that intervention in that
war was justified and necessary. We were
defending a country that clearly wanted 'to
be defended: its army was willing to fight
and fought well, and its government, though
dictorial, was a patriotic government which
commanded the support of the people.
Throughout the war, however, the United
States emphasized as one of its war aims
tile survival of the Republic of Korea as a
"free society," something which it was not
then or for a long time after the war. We
lost 33,629 American lives in the war and
have since spent $5.61 billion on direct mili-
tary and economic aid and a great deal more
on indirect aid to South Korea. The coun-
try, nonetheless, remained until recently in
,0 William Makepeace Thackery, "The New-
comes," Oh. 20.
10301
a condition of virtual economic stagnation
and political instability. These facts are
regrettable but the truly surprising fact is
that, having fought a war for three years
to defend the freedom of South Korea, most
Americans are probably ignorant of and al-
most certainly uninterested in the current
state of the ward for whom they sacrificed
so much.
We are now engaged in a war to "defend
freedom" in South Vietnam. Unlike the Re-
public of Korea, South Vietnam has an
army which without notable success and
a weak, dictatorial government which does
not command the loyalty of the South
Vietnamese people. The official war aims
of the United States Government, as I
understand them, are to defeat what is re-
garded as North Vietnamese aggression, to
demonstrate the futility of what the com-
munists call "wars of national liberation,"
and to create conditions under which the
South Vietnamese people will be able freely
to determine their own future. I have
not the slightest doubt of the sincerity of
the President and the Vice President and
the Secretaries of State and Defense in pro-
pounding these aims. What I do doubt?
and doubt very much?is the ability of the
United States to achieve these aims by the
means being used. I do not question the
power of our weapons and the efficiency of
our logistics; I cannot say these things
delight me as they seem to delight some of
our officials, but they are certainly im-
pressive. What I do question is the ability
of the United States, or France or any other
Western nation, to go into a small, alien,
undeveloped Asian nation and create sta-
bility where there is chaos, the will to fight
where there is defeatism, democracy where
there is no tradition of it and honest gov-
ernment where corruption is almost a way
of life. Our handicap is well expressed in
the pungent Chinese proverb: "In shallow
waters dragons become the sport of
shrimps."
Early last month demonstrators Ir Saigon
burned American jeeps, tried to assault
American soldiers, and marched through the
streets shouting "Down with the American
imperialists," while one of the Buddhist
leaders made a speech equating the United
States with the communists as a threat to
South Vietnamese independence. Most
Americans are understandably shocked and
angered to encounter such hostility from
people who by now would be under the rule
of the Viet Cong but for the sacrifice of
American lives and money. Why, we may
ask, are t hey so shockingly ungrateful?
Surely they must know that their very right
to parade and protest and demonstrate de-
pends on the Americans who are defending
them.
The answer, I think, is that "fatal impact"
of the rich and strong on the poor and
weak. Dependent on it though the Viet-
namese are, our very strength is a reproach
to their weakness, our wealth a mockery of
their poverty, our success a reminder of
their failures. What they resent is the dis-
ruptive effect of our strong culture upon
their fragile one, an effect which we can no
more avoid than a man can help being
bigger than a child. What they fear, I think
rightly, is that traditional Vietnamese so-
ciety cannot survive the American economic
and cultural impact.
Both literally and figuratively, Saigon has
become an American brothel. A New Fork
Times correspondent reports that many
Vietnamese find it necessary to put their
wives or daughters to work as bar girls or to
peddle them to American soldiers as mis-
tresses; that it is not unusual to hear a re-
port that a Vietnamese soldier has committed
suicide out of shame because his wife has
been working as a bar girl; that Vietnamese
have trouble getting taxi cabs because
drivers will not stop for them, preferring to
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP6780.0446j3000400070009.2.
10302 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD --- SENAM may 17, 1966
pick up American soldiers who will pay out-
rageous fares without complaint; that as a
result of the American influx, bar girls, pros-
titutes, pimps, bar owners and taxi drivers
have risen to the higher levels of the eco-
nomic pyramid; that middle class Viet-
namese families have difficulty renting homes
because Americans have driven up the rent
beyond their reach and some Vietnamese
families have actually been evicted from
houses and apartments by landlords who
prefer to rent to the affluent Americans; that
Vietnamese civil servants, junior army offi-
cers and enlisted men are unable to support
their families because of the inflation gen-
erated by American spending and the pur-
chasing power of the Giesso
The Secretary of Defense recently reported
with pride that his Department is providing
9.2 pounds of goods a day for each GI. for
sale in the POres; what the Secretary ne-
glected to point out was that these vast
quantities of consumer goods are the major
source of supply for the thriving Vietnamese
black market. It is reported that 30 thou-
sand cans of hair spray were sent to Vietnam
in March of 1966; since it is unlikely that
the American fighting men are major con-
sumers of hair spray, it seems reasonable
'1;0 suppose that this item has found its way
to the black market.
One Vietnamese explained to the New York
Times reporter whom I mentioned that "Any
time legions of prosperous white men descend
on a rudimentary Asian society, you are
bound to have trouble.'' Another said: "We
'Vietnamese are somewhat xenophobe. We
don't like foreigners, any kind of foreigners,
so that you shouldn't be surprised that we
don't like you." e=
Sincere though it is, the American effort
to build the foundations of freedom in South
Vietnam may thus have an effect quite dif-
ferent from the one intended. "All this
struggling and striving to make the world
better is a great mistake:" said Bernard
Shaw, "not because it isn't a good thing to
improve the world if you know how to do it,
but because striving and struggling is the,
worst way you could set about doing any-
thing."
One wonders as well how much our coin-
initment to Vietnamese freedom is also a
commitment to American pride. The two,
think, have become part of the same pack-
age. When we talk about the freedom of
South Vietnam, we may be thinking about
how disagreeable it would be to accept a
solution short of victory; we may be think-
ing about how our pride would be injured
if we settled for less than we set out to
achieve: we may be thinking about our
reputation as a great power, as though a
compromise settlement would shame us be-
fore the world, marking us as a second rate
people with nagging courage and determina-
tion.
Such fears are as nonsensical as their op-
posite, which is the presumption oi a uni-
versal mission. They are simply unworthy
of the richest, most powerful, most produc-
tive and, best educated people in the world.
One can understand an uncompromising at-
titude o.n the part of such countries as China
or France; both have been stricken low in
this century and arrogance may be helpful
to taem in recovering their pride. It is much
less comprehensible on the part of the
United States, a nation whose modern his-
tory has been an almost uninterrupted
chronicle of success, a nation which by
now should be so sure of its own power as ba
be capable of magnanimity, a nation which
Neil Sheehan, "Anti-Americanism Grows
in Vietnam," The New York Times, April 24,
1966, p. 3.
George Bernard Sh.aw, Cashel Byron's
Profession (11186) Ch. 5,
by now should be able to act on the proposi-
tion, as expressed by George Kerman, that
"there is more respect to be won in the
opinion of the world by a resolute and cour-
ageous liquidation of unsound positions
than in the most stubborn pursuit of ex-
travagant or unpromising objectives."14
The cause of our difficulties in southeast
Asia is not a deficiency of power but an
excess of the wrong kind of power which re-
sults in a feeling of importance when it
fails to achieve its desired ends. We are still
acting like boy scouts dragging reluctant
old ladies across the streets they do not want
to cross. We are trying to remake Viet-
namese society, a task which certainly can-
not be accomplished by force and which
probably cannot be accomplished by any
means available to outsiders. The objective
may be desirable, but it is not feasible.
There is wisdom if also malice in Prince
Sihanouk's comparison of American and
Chinese aid. "You will note the difference in
the ways of giving," he writes. "On one side
we are being humiliated, we are given a
lecture, we are required to give something
in return. On the other side, nos only is
our dignity as poor people being preserved,
but our self-esteem is being flattered--and
human beings have their weaknesses, and it
would be futile to try to eradicate [them]." iS
Or, as Shaw said: "Religion is a great force?
the only real motive force in the world; but
what you fellows don't understand is that
you must get at a man through hi:: own re-
ligion and not through yours." iS
The idea of being responsible for the whole
world seems to be flattering to A tiler jeans
and I am afraid it is turning our heads, just
as the sense of global responsibility turned
the heads of ancient Romans and nineteenth
century British. A prominent American is
credited with having said recently that the
United States was the "engine of mankind"
and the rest of the world was "the train."
A British political writer wrote law summer
what he called "A Cheer for American Im-
perialism." An empire, he said, "has no
justification except its own existence." It
must never contract; it "wastes treasure and
life;" its commitments "are without rhyme
or reason." Nonetheless, according to the
author, the "American empire" is uniquely
benevolent, devoted as it is to individual
liberty and the rule of law, and having per-
formed such services as getting tie author
released from a Yugoslav jail simply by his
threatening to involve the American consul,
a service which he describes as "sitblime."",
What romantic nonsense this is. .And what
dangerous nonsense in this age er nuclear
weapons. The idea of an "American empire"
might be dismissed as the arrant imagining
of a British Clunga Din except for the fact
that it surely strikes a responsive chord in
-----
, George F. Kennan, 'Supplemental For-
eign Assistance Fiscal Year 19166?Vietnam,"
Hearings before the Conunittee on Foreign
Relations, United States Senate, 39th Con-
gress, 2nd Session on S. 2793, Part 1 (Wash-
ington: U.S. Government Printing Office,
1966), p. 335.
16 Norodom Sihanouk, "The Failure of the
United States in the 'Third World'--Seen
Through the Lesson of Cambodia." Re-
printed in Congressional Record, September
28, 1965, p. 21413.
George Bernard Shaw, Getting Married
(1911).
" McGeorge Bundy is said to have said that
in an interview with Henry F. Graff, Professor
of History at Columbia University, who re-
ported it in "How Johnson Makes Foreign
Policy," New York Times Magaziae, July 4,
1965, p. 17..
"'Henry Fairlie, writer for The Spectator
and The Daily Telegraph of London, in "A
Cheer for American Imperialism," New York
Times Magazine, July 11, 1965.
at least a corner of the usually sensible and
humane American mind. It calls to mind the
slogans of the past about the shot fired at
Concord being heard round the world, about
"manifest destiny" and "making the world
safe for democracy" and the demand for
"unconditional surrender" in World War H.
It calls to mind President McKinley taking
counsel with the Supreme Being about his
duty to the benighted Filipinos.
The "Blessings-of-Civilization Trust," as
Mark Twain called it, may have been a
"Daisy" in its day, uplifting for the soul and
good for business besides, but its day is past.
It is past because the great majority of the
human race are demanding dignity and in-
dependence not the honor of a supine role
In an American empire. It is past because
whatever claim America may make for the
universal domain of its ideas and values is
countered by the communist counter-claim,
armed like our own with nuclear weapons.
And, most of all, it is past because it never
should have begun, because we are not the
"engine of mankind" but only one of Its more
successful and fortunate branches, endowed
by our Creator with about the same .etpactty
for good and evil, no more or less, than the
rest of humanity.
An excessive preoccupation with foreign re-
lations over a long period of time is a prob-
lem of great importance because it diverts a
nation from the sources of its strength, which
are in its domestic life. A nation iminersed
in foreign affairs is expending its cap, tal, hu-
man as well as material; ,sooner or Inter that
capital must be renewed by some diversion of
creative energies from foreign to domestic
pursuits. I would doubt that any nation has
achieved a durable greatness by conducting
a "strong" foreign policy, but maay have
been ruined by expending their energies on
foreign adventures while allowing their do-
mestic bases to deteriorate. The United
States emerged as a world power in the
twentieth century not-because of what it had
done in foreign relations but because it had
spent the nineteenth century developing the
North American continent; by contrast, the
Austrian and Turkish empires collapsed in
the twentieth century in large part because
they had for so long neglected their internal
development and organization.
If America has a service to perform in the
world--and I believe it has?it is in large part
the service of its own example. In our ex-
cessive involvement in the affairs of other
countries, we are not only living off our assets
and denying our own people the proper en-
joyment of their resources; we are also deny-
ing the world the example of a free society
enjoying its freedom to the fullest. This is
regrettable indeed for a nation that aspires
to teach democracy to other nations, because,
as Burke said, "Example is the school of man-
kind, and they will learn at no other." le
There is of course nothing new about
the inversion of values which lends nations
to squander their resources on friii:Jess and
extravagant foreign undertakings What
is new is the power of man to destroy his
species, which has made the struggles ol
international politics dangerous as they have
never been before and confronted us. as Dr
Chisholm says, with the need to reexamine
the attitudes of our ancestors so as to dis-
card those that have ceased to be valid.
Somehow, therefore, if we are to save our-
selves, we must find in ourselves the judg-
ment and the will to change the nature
of international politics in order to make
it at once less dangerous to mankind and
more beneficial to individual men. Without
deceiving ourselves as to the difficulty of the
task, we must try to develop a new capacity
for creative political action. We must roe-
-0 Edmund Burke, "On a Regicide Peace,"
(1796) ?
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
Amy 1966 Approved Foc8skykeEsg9g9 2tt@ORFip_e_6gE3991411R000400070009-2 10303
ognize, first of all, that the ultimate source
of war and peace lies in human nature, that
the study of politics, therefore, is the study
of man, and that if politics is ever to acquire
a new character, the change will not be
wrought in computers but through a better
understanding of the needs and fears of the
human individual.
It is a curious thing that in an era
when interdisciplinary studies are favored
in the universities little, so far as I know,
has been done to apply the insights of in-
dividual and social psychology to the study
of international relations.
It would be interesting?to raise one of
many possible questions?to see what could
be learned about the psychological roots of
ideology: to what extent are ideological
beliefs the result of a valid and disinterested
intellectual process and to what extent are
they instilled in us by conditioning and in-
heritance? Or, to put the question another
way, why exactly is it that most young Rus-
sians grow up believing in communism and
most young Americans grow up believing
in democracy or, for that matter, what ac-
counts for the coincidence that most Arabs
believe in Islam and most Spaniards in
Catholicism? What, in short, is the real
source of ideological beliefs and what value
do they have as concepts of reality, much less
as principles for which men should be willing
to fight and die?
I recently had the privilege of a lunch-
eon with the distinguished Johns Hopkins
psychiatrist, Dr. Jerome Frank, and he ex-
plained to me some psychiatric principles
which may be pertinent to a better under-
standing of international relations. He
pointed out, for example, that an ideology
gives us an identity beyond our own trivial
and transitory lives on earth and also serves
the purpose of "organizing the world" for
us, giving us a picture, though not neces-
sarily an accurate picture, of reality. A
person's worldview, or ideology, says Dr.
Frank, filters the signals that come to him,
giving meaning and pattern to otherwise odd
bits of information. Thus, for example,
when a Chinese and an American put radi-
cally different interpretations on the Viet-
namese war, it is not necessarily because one
or the other has chosen to propound a wicked
lie but rather because each has filtered in-
formation from the real world through his
ideological worldview, selecting the parts
that fit, rejecting the parts that do not, and
coming out with two radically different in-
terpretations of the same events.
There is a "strain toward consistency"
which leads a country, once it has decided
that another country is good or bad, peaceful
or aggressive, to interpret every bit of infor-
mation to fit that preconception, so much so
that even a genuine concession offered by one
is likely to be viewed by the other as a trick
to gain some illicit advantage. A possible
manifestation of this tendency is the North
Vietnamese view of American proposals to
negotiate peace as fraudulent plots. Having
been betrayed after previous negotiations?
by the French in 1946 and by Ngo Dinh Diem
in 1955 when, with American complicity, he
refused to allow the elections called for in
the Geneva Accords to take place?the Hanoi
Government may now feel that American
offers to negotiate peace, which we believe
to be genuine, are in reality plots to trick
them into yielding through diplomacy what
we have been unable to make them yield by
force.
Another interesting point is the shaping of
behavior by expectations, or what is called
the self-fulfilling prophecy. Thus, for ex-
ample. China, fearing the United States but
lacking power, threatens and blusters, con-
firming the United States in its fears of
China and causing it to arm against her,
which in turn heightens Chinese fears of the
No.81-11
United States. Professor Gordon Allport of
Harvard made the point some years ago that
". . . while most people deplore war, they
nonetheless expect it to Continue. And what
people expect determines their behavior."
". . the indispensable condition of war,"
wrote Professor Allport, "is that people must
expect war and must prepare for war, before,
under war-minded leadership, they make
war. It is in this sense that 'wars begin in
the minds of men.' "20
Another striking psychological phenom-
enon is the tendency of antagonists ao dehu-
manize each other. To most Americans
China is a strange, distant and dangerous
nation, not a society made up of 700 million
individual human beings but a kind of
menacing abstraction. When Chinese sol-
diers are described, for example, as "hordes of
Chinese coolies," it is clear that they are be-
ing thought of not as people but as some-
thing terrifying and abstract, or as some-
thing inanimate like the flow of lava from a
volcano. Both China and America seem to
think of each other as abstractions: to the
Chinese we are not a society of individual
people but the embodiment of an evil idea,
the idea of "imperialist capitalism;" and to
most of us China represents not people but
an evil and frightening idea, the idea of
"aggressive communism."
Obviously, this dehumanizing tendency
helps to explain the savagery of war. Man's
capacity for decent behavior seems to vary
directly with his perception of others as in-
dividual humans with human motives and
feelings, whereas his capacity for barbarous
behavior seems to increase with his percep-
tion of an adversary in abstract terms. This
is the only explanation I can think of for
the fact that the very same good and decent
citizens who would never fail to feed a hun-
gry child or comfort a sick friend or drop a
coin in the church collection basket celebrate
the number of Viet Cong killed in a particu-
lar week or battle and can now contemplate
with equanimity, or indeed even advocate,
the use of nuclear weapons against the
"hordes of Chinese coolies." I feel sure that
this apparent insensitivity to the incinera-
tion of thousands of millions of our fellow
human beings is not the result of feelings of
savage inhumanity toward foreigners; it is
the result of not thinking of them as humans
at all but rather as the embodiment of doc-
trines that we consider evil.
Dr. Chisholm suggests that "What we the
people of the world need, perhaps most, is to
exercise our imaginations, to develop our
ability to look at things from outside our
accidental area of being." Most of us, he
says, "have never taken out our imaginations
for any kind of run in all our lives," but
rather have kept them tightly locked up
within the limits of our own national per-
spective."
The obvious value of liberating the imagi-
nation is that it might enable us to acquire
some understanding of the view of the world
held by people whose past experience and
present situations are radically different from
our own. It might enable us to understand,
for example, what it feels like to be hungry,
not hungry in the way that a middle-class
American feels after a golf game or a fast
tennis match, but hungry as an Asian might
be hungry, with a hunger that has never
been satisfied, with one's children having
stunted limbs and swollen bellies, with a de-
sire to change things that has little regard
for due process of the law because the desire
for change has an urgency and desperation
about it that few Americans have ever ex-
20 Gordon W, Allport, "The Role of Ex-
pectancy," Tensions That Cause Wars, Hadley
Cantril, ed, (University of Illinois Press,
1950), p. 43.
20 Broch Chisholm, Presicription for Sur-
vival, ibid, p. 76.
perienced. Could we but liberate our
imagination in this way, we might be able to
see why so many people in the world are
making revolutions; we might even be able
to see why some of them are communists.
Having suggested, as best an amateur can,
some of the psychological principles that
might be pertinent to international relations.
I now venture to suggest some applications.
Paranoid fears, says Dr. Frank, are not en-
tirely false fears; certainly, China's fear of
American hostility, though distorted and ex-
aggerated, is not pure invention. In dealing
with paranoid individuals, Dr. Frank sug-
gests, it is generally desirable to listen re-
spectfully without agreeing but also with-
out trying to break down or attack the pa-
tient's system of beliefs. It is also important
not to get over friendly lest the patient in-
terpret effusive overtures as a hostile plot.
Dr. Frank also suggests that the paranoid
patient is certain to rebuff overtures of
friendship many times before beginning to
respond.
Applying these principles to China, per-
haps the best thing we can do for the time
being is to reduce expressions of hostility,
put forth only such limited proposals for
friendship as might be credible, and other-
wise leave her strictly alone. In the wake of
the historical trauma to which I referred
last week, China's fear and hatred of the
West is probably still too deep and likely to
remain so for some time to come, to permit
of positive cooperation, or, indeed, of any-
thing beyond what we might call mutually
respectful relations from a distance.
Before China can accept the hand of West-
ern friendship, she must first recover pride.
She must recover that sense of herself as a
great civilization which was so badly bat-
tered in the nineteenth century and, with it,
the strength to open her door to the outside
World, Having been all but destroyed as a
nation by the forced intrusions of the West,
China must first know that she has the
strength to reject unwanted foreign influ-
ences before she can be expected to seek or
accept friendly foreign associations. Or, to
make the same point from the side of the
United States, before we can extend the
hand of friendship to China with any expec-
tation of it being accepted, we must first
persuade her that we respect her right to
take what we offer or leave it as she thinks
best. There is no better way to convey this
message to China than by leaving her alone.
If we can give our imaginations a "good
run" as Dr. Chisholm recommends, we are
likely to learn that the "way of life" which
we so eagerly commend to the world has lit-
tle pertinent either to China's past experi-
ence or to her future needs. China, Dr. Fair-
bank tells us, is a society in which the con-
cept of "individualism" which we cherish is
held in low esteem because it connotes a
chaotic selfishness, the opposite of the com-
mitment to the collective good which is
highly valued by the Chinese. Similarly, the
very word for "freedom" (tzu-yu) is said
to connote a lack of discipline, even license,
the very opposite of the Chinese ideal of dis-
ciplined cooperation. Even such basic West-
ern ideas as "loyal opposition" and "self-
determination," Professor Fairbank points
out, are alien to the Chinese. The cultural
gap is further illustrated by the difference
in attitudes toward philanthropy: to Ameri-
cans, it is a Christian virtue; to the Chinese
it is, unless reciprocal, insulting and degrad-
ing?something that we might keep in mind
if relations ever thaw enough to make con-
ceivable American economic aid or, more
plausibly, disaster relief in the event of some
natural calamity such as flood or famine."
22John K. Fairbank, "How to Deal with
the Chinese Revolution," New York Review
of Books, February 17, 1966, Volume VI, No.
2, p. 14.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
-,. 4
10304 Approved For RteemffiA/16-int gliteglit7J3.09M6Np0400070009-2 may 17 f9 6 6
In the light of these profound cultural dif-
ferences, shall we, in Mark Twain's words,
"go on conferring our Civilization upon the
peoples that sit in darkness, or shall we give
those poor things a rest?" 23
There are, I think, some limited positive
steps which the United States might take to-
ward improved relations with China. It
would do the United States no harm in the
short run and perhaps considerable good in
the long run to end our opposition to the
seating of Communist China in the United
Nations and, depending on events, to follow
that up with some positive suggestions for
more normal relations. The United States
has already propthed visits by scholars and
n9Wspapermen between China and the United
States; and, although these proposals have
been rejected by the Chinese, it might be well,
though not too often and not too eagerly;- to
remind them of the offer from time to time.
In proposing these and other initiatives to
the Senate Foreign Relations Committee as
major components in a policy of "without
containment isolation," Professor Doak Bar-
nett made the point that "In taking these
steps, we will have to do so in full recognition
of the fact that Peking's initial reaction is al-
most certain to be negative and hostile and
that any changes in our posture will create
some new problems. But we should take
them nevertheless, because initiatives on our
part are clearly required if we are to work,
however slowly, toward the long term goal of
a more stable, less explosive situation in Asia
and to explore the possibilities of trying to
moderate Peking's policies." 24
The point of such a new approach to China,
writes Professor Fairbank, is psychological:
"Peking is, to say the least, maladjusted,
rebellious against the whole outer world.
Russia as well as America. We are Peking's
principal enemy because we happen now to be
the biggest 'outside power , trying to foster
world stability. But do we have to play
Mao's game? Must we carry the whole bur-
den of resisting Peking's pretensions? Why
not let others in on the job?
"A Communist China seated in the UN,"
Fairbank continues, "could no longer pose
as a martyr excluded by 'American imperial-
ism,' She would have to face the self-inter-
est of other countries, and learn to act as a
full member of international society for the
first time in history. This is the only way
for China to grow up and eventually accept
restraints on her revolutionary ardor." 25
The most difficult and dangerous of issues
between the United States and China is the
confrontation of their power in southeast
Asia, an issue which, because of its explosive
possibilities, cannot be consigned to the heal-
ing effects of time. I have suggested in re-
cent statements how I think this issue might
be resolved by an agreement for the neutral-
ization of Vietnam under the guarantee of
the great powers, and I will not repeat the
specifications of my proposal tonight.
Should it be possible to end the Viet-
namese war on the basis of an agreement for
the neutralization of southeast Asia, it
Would then be possible to concentrate with
real hope of success on the long difficult task
of introducing some trust into relations be-
tween China and the Wept, of repairing his-
tory's ravages and bringing the great
Chinese nation into its proper role as a re-
spected member of the international com-
munity. In time it might even be possible
for the Chinese and Taiwanese on their own
to work out some arrangement for Taiwan
that would not do too much damage either
24"To the Person Sitting in Darkness,?.
from Europe and Elsewhere.
2A Statement of Professor A. Doak Barnett
before the United States Senate Foreign Re-
lations Committee, March 8, 1966, pp.' 2,
13-15.
25 John K. Fairbank, "How to Deal with the
Chinese Revolution," ibid., p. 18.
to the concept of self-determination or to the
Chinese concept of China's cultural indivisi-
bility?perhaps some sort of an arrangement
for Taiwanese self-government under nomi-
nal Chinese suzerainty. But that would be
for them to decide.
All this is not, as has been suggested, a
matter of "being kind to China." It is a
matter of altering that fatal expectancy
which is leading two great nations toward
a tragic and unnecessary war. If it involves
"being kind to China," those who are re-
pelled by that thought may take some small
comfort in the fact that it also involves
"being kind to America."
On November 14, 1860, Alexander Hamil-
ton Stephens, who subsequently became
Vice-President of the Southern Confederacy,
delivered an address to the Georgia Legisla-
ture in which he appealed to his colleagues
to delay the secession of Georgia from the
Union. "It may be," he said, "that out of it
we may become greater and more prosper-
ous, but I am candid and sincere in telling
you that I fear if we yield to passion and
without sufficient cause shall take that step,
that instead of becoming greater or more
peaceful, prosperous and happy?instead of
becoming Gods, we will become demons, an'd
at no distant day commence cutting one an-
other's throats. This is my apprehension.
Let us, therefore, whatever we do, meet these
difficulties, great as they are, like wise and
sensible men, and consider them in the light
of all the consequences which may attend
our action." 25
What a tragedy it is that the South did
not accept Stephens' advice in 1860. What
a blessing it would be if, faced with the
danger of a war with China, we did accept
it today.
In its relations with China, as indeed in
its relations with all of the revolutionary
or potentially revolutionary societies of the
world, America has an opportunity to per-
form services of which no great nation has
ever before been capable. To do so we
must acquire wisdom to match our power
and humility to match our pride. Perhaps
the single word above all others that ex-
presses America's need is "empathy," which
Webster defines as the "imaginative projec-
tion of one's own consciousness into an-
other being."
There are many respects in which Amer-
ica, if it can bring itself to act with the
magnanimity and the empathy appropriate
to its size and power, can be an intelligent
example to the world. We have the oppor-
tunity to set an example of generous under-
standing in our relations with China, of
practical cooperation for peace in our rela-
tions with Russia, of reliable and respectful
partnership in our relations with Western
Europe, of material helfulness without moral
presumption in our relations with the de-
veloping nations, of abstention from the
temptations of hegemony in our relations
with Latin America, and of the all-around
advantages of minding one's own business
in our relations with everybody. Most of all,
we have the opportunity to serve as an ex-
ample of democracy to the world by the way
in which we run our own society; America,
in the words of John Quincy Adams, should
be "the well-wisher to the freedom and in-
dependence of all" but "the champion and
vindicator only of her own." 25
? If we can bring ourselves so to act, we
will have overcome the dangers of the arro-
gance of power. It will involve, no doubt,
the loss of certain glories, but that seems
a price worth paying for the probable re-
wards, which are the happiness of America
and the peace of the world.
26Alexander Hamilton Stephens, "Seces-
sion," in Modern Eloquence (New York: P.
'F. Collier & Sons, 1928), Vol. II, p. 203.
2T John Quincy Adams, July 4, 1821, Wash-
ington, D.C. Reported in National
Intelli-
gencer, July 11, 1821.
[From Life magazine, May 13, 19661
THE ROOTS OF THE ARKANSAS QUESTIONER
? (By Brock Brower)
It's hard any longer to catch the flash of
sweet-water Ozark crik that runs through
Senator J. WILLIAM FULBRIGHT'S stony elo-
quence. Mostly, these days, he's keeping to
dry, somber, history-minded warnings
against the "fatal presumption" that, he
fears, could lead America, via Vietnam, to
become "what it is not now and never has
been, a seeker after unlimited power and
empire."
All this, like as not, in the formal rhetoric
of white tie and tails. Even when he does
take an incidental turn as a plain Arkansas
country boy, everybody claims to know bet-
ter than to believe this. They count him
rich enough back home, smart enough all
around the rest of the world, and long
enough in the U.S. Senate-21 years?to
have got over any of that he ever had in him.
The countrification is purely for emphasis
now, just his way of shooting an extra-hard
public look over the top of his tinted glasses
at the store-bought Vietnam and China poli-
cies of that other hillbilly, Dean Rusk.
Otherwise, according to those who see him
as the only temperate and credible public
critic of a whole series of Administration po-
sitions, Senator FuLraucirr belongs at this
critical moment not to Arkansas but to world
opinion. The silly mistake too many of these
intellectual admirers of his make?even as
they put him atop a kind of opposing sum-
mit of American foreign policy?is to think
it's some kind of secret burden for him to
have come from Arkansas at all.
"They think Arkansas and the South are
millstones around his neck, says one north-
ern urban liberal, who has found out differ-
ently since going to work for his hero on the
Foreign Relations Committee staff, "but
they're wrong. He knows his roots."
In fact, there is an underlying parochial-
ism in the senator's harshest arguments
against the 'U.S. involvement in Southeast
Asia. Vietnam to him is "this god-forsaken,
little country" for which any Arkansas trav-
eler, remembering some of the dragged-down
patches of the Ozarks, could only feel sym-
pathy if he ever stumbled across it.
"I wonder why these people are so dedi-
cated?" he asks rhetorically about the Viet-
cong. "Why do these people do this? How
do they come by their fanaticism? Well,
coming from the South, with all its memor-
ies of Reconstruction, I think I can under-
stand. They've been put upon, and it makes
them so fanatical they'll fight down to the
last man."
It's an attitude he can see people taking
down in his own mountain corner of Ar-
kansas, a place never so far from his mind
as some would like to have it; a place, in
fact, where he went to live at one earlier
time in his life when he left a job in Wash-
ington, D.C. and spent seven apolitical years,
teaching law part time and living on an
isolated hill farm called Rabbit's Foot Lodge.
"It was a curious hybrid," he admits, prob-
ably the closest thing there'll ever be to an
Ozark teahouse. It was built rustic enough,
out of adzed logs and clay calking, with lots
of wide porches all around. But whoever
put it up had clearly been to China and,
from down below the spring, looking back
up at the muley roofiine, it didn't take much
of an eye to see it was practically a damn
pagoda. For a man who hates even the
noise of his wife's snow tires, that Oriental
log cabin offered just about the right amount
of peace and quiet. In the midst of the
acrimonious hearings over Vietnam?with
much of the uproar centering around his own
vigorous dissent from the Administration's
handling of the war?Senator FULBRIGHT
didn't mind thinking an occasional long
thonght about what it used to be like down
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
e6ftytmalfA/0.16/R29.1tiocluria...P_LIPsErail49014A6R000400070009-2
Ma Approved F
c Mai 7, 1966 10305
there, with no politics "to take time and
energy away from the substance of things."
"It's very serene Country," he says, brood-
ing a little. He went there to live in 1936,
bored with life in the capital as a Justice
Department antitrust lawyer. His wife
Betty was with him, very far from her own
Republican upbringing on Philadelphia's
Main Line. "It was just like taking a
squirrel who's been in a cage all its life and
letting it out in the fresh air. You know
that Main Line life? It's ba-roniall" The
squirrel got loose with a pot of paint and
had the whole inside of Rabbit's Foot Lodge
fione over in Colonial White instead of leav-
ing it Mountain Dark, but other than that
and kicking all the roupy chickens out of
the cellar Betty managed to fit right in with
local ways?a handsome, sophisticated
woman Who could still be "just as plain
as pig tracks" with anybody she happened to
meet.
BILL FULBRIGHT wasn't doing much besides
teaching at the University of Arkansas, scene
of his former glory as a Razorback halfback,
a few miles away in a little Ozark town called
Fayetteville that his family a-quarter-to-a-
half owned. He loved teaching and the life
at the university; and when the trustees
suddenly decided to make him president at
the tender age of 34, he felt pretty well
settled. He could even stay right on out at
Rabbit's Foot Lodge because the university
didn't have any official manse to house its
president back then.
The only one who thought to worry about
them way out there was Betty's mother,
When she opened up her Philadelphia In-
quirer one morning and saw pictures of bales
of cotton floating around in the Arkansas
floods of 1938, she wired her daughter:
hadn't she "better come north immediately
and bring the two children." Betty wired
back that the floods were as yet 1,700 feet
below them and still 300 miles away. And
when a hurricane struck New England later
that year, they telegraphed her mother:
hadn't she better come down to Arkansas
to avoid being hit by a falling elm tree?
That's the way they go about keeping
everybody up-to-date and informed down
in Arkansas. With a needling kind of
courtesy. In fact, nobody's ever going to
settle for a simple, straight answer as long as
there's time to work one up into a little more
elaborative shape. The senator often goes
to work in that same way at committee
hearings, politely needling the witness in
order to elicit the fullest sort of disclosure.
He doesn't, for instance, just want to find
out what prospects were for free elections in
Vietnam in 1956. "Now [the chances] have
always been poor, and will be for a hundred
years, won't they?" he gently prods Dean
Rusk. "That was not news to you. . .
Have they ever had them in 2,000 years of
history?" And possibly- one of the senator's
annoyances with Dean Rusk is that the
Secretary keeps giving him the same, simple,
straight answers?which somehow fail to
satisfy FULBRIGHT% own deep doubts about
the nature of the war?and won't even try
to put his replies into any more instructive
form. But the senator can sympathize with
the Secretary of State: "It's a hell of a job."
In late 1960, when there was loose talk
around that FuLsatcarr might be picked for
Secretary of State in Kennedy's cabinet, the
possibility thoroughly distressed him: "It's
not my dish of tea. I'd hate the protocol,
and I'd be damned uncomfortable getting up
and giving speeches with which I didn't
agree. The poor fella in that job never has
time to think for himself."
None of the kind of time for reflection
that existed out at Rabbit's Foot Lodge,
where the steps down to the spring are too
step to be taken any more than one at a
time. That water was so clear and cold,"
he likes to remember. He didn't have a
single political connection, beyond the co-
incidental fact that his local congressman,
Clyde T. Ellis, had been coming to his classes
to pick up a little constitutional law. "I
had no idea I'd ever be in politics," he in-
sists. "I sometimes wonder what would've
happened if Mother hadn't written that
editorial.
"Oh, I don't mean I ponder over it all that
much," he says, quickly dismissing that kind
of bootless speculation. Nobody else should
give it too much thought either, except just
enough to keep in mind that, despite a quar-
ter century in public life, Senator FULBRIGHT
Is essentially a private man manqu?More
than any other senator, he comes forward
to address himself to issues from the privacy
of his own thoughts, and promptly returns
there as soon as his opinion has been offered.
Not that he doesn't enjoy the measure of po-
litical prominence that is his as chairman
of the Foreign Relations Committee?always
much in the headlines after another mum-
bled, seminal speech on the Senate floor, and
often seen around social Washington with
his wife, who dutifully mends the holes in.
his protocol. But, as one of his aides ex-
plains the difference between him and most
senators: "When he's busy, he's busy behind
a closed door."
He is an anomaly, especially in gregarious
Southern politics, a man of intellect, almost
a seminarian, pursuing an aloof career as an
often dissident public counselor?he's been
called "the Walter Lippmann of the Sen-
ate"?with no more real political base than
perhaps those few capricious jottings in his
mother's newspaper long ago.
Mrs. Roberta Fulbright, an old school-
teacher herself, was the kind of woman who
makes the local Rotarians wonder how far
she might've gone if she'd ever been a man?
only they wonder right out loud and proudly,
pleased to see the local library and a univers-
ity dormitory named for her. Back in 1906
her husband, Jay Fulbright, got the family
off the farm in Missouri by setting up his
first little, two-person bank in Arkansas and
thereafter pushed the Fulbrights' fortunes to
an estimable point. But, in 1923, he died
suddenly, leaving Mrs. Fulbright with six off-
spring; BILL FULBRIGHT, their fourth child,
was 18 at the time.
"We came very damn close to going to the
poorhouse," Finzatcur says, exaggerating
some, "but she managed to salvage enough
of a nest egg to start over again." That is,
she let go the bank stock but kept the lum-
ber business, the Coca-Cola bottling plant,
a lot of real estate and a few other Ful-
bright Enterprises?including a newspaper.
Eventually she accumulated enough leverage
to clean up the whole county once?but
good, throwing out a corrupt courthouse
gang and dragging her own man, Buck Lewis,
with his big horse pistol, down to Little
Rock to get him appointed sheriff.
"But her one big love, besides her family,"
says FULBRIGHT, "was that newspaper." It's
now the Northwest Arkansas Times, and
turning a tidy penny. But back then it was
The Democrat, a sorry investment, mostly
useful for printing the columns Mother Ful-
bright scribbled together after nobody in
the family was left awake to talk to her any-
more. ("She loved to talk, God, she
loved to talk! She'd wear us out, staying
up at night.") She'd write until 3 o'clock
in the morning about anything from cooking
to politics, or sometimes both at once: "Our
politics remind me of the pies the mountain
girl had. She asked the guests, 'Will you
have kivered, unkivered or crossbar?' All
apple. Now that's what we have?kivered,
unkivered and crossbar politics, all Demo-
crats." And so Mother Fulbright wrote a
thing or two about a Democrat named Homer
Adkins. In fact, right after Adkins' trium-
phant election as governor in 1940, she wrote
that the people of Arkansas had just traded
a statesmen, Governor Car Bally, for a glad-
hander and a backslapper.
Governor Adkins returned the compliment
by stacking the university board of trustees
high enough to have her son fired as pres-
ident. So then Congressman Ellis came up
to his ex-law professor, almost like it was
after class, and said since he, Ellis, was going
to announce for U.S. senator next Staturday,
"you ought to run for my place."
"I'd have never dreamed of it," says FUL-
BRIGHT. "I hadn't even been in three of the
10 counties in all my life." But he was
pretty much at loose ends, so he got around
to those last three counties before Saturday
and carried all 10 in the fall of 1942 to win
the House seat, And when Governor Adkins
decided to run for U.S. senator in 1944, so did
Congressman FULBRIGHT; and he beat Adkins,
and three other candidates--kivered, unkiv-
ered and crossbar.
"Homer Adkins," his mother wrote as her
final word against her old enemy, imitating
his bad grammar, "has came and went."
And her son has now been and gone to the
Senate for four terms, not so much a political
success as an outsized civic achievement for
which the whole state of Arkansas feels it
can humbly take a worldwide bow: "He's just
as smart as $700." "He's known in every
corner of the world." "Who the hell'd've ever
dreamed we'd have an international scholar
from Arkansas?" "He's an institution. Peo-
ple don't vote against institutions."
"You can beat him.," an adviser once told
Governor Orval Faubus, who was eager to
try in 1962, and might be even more ready
in 1968, "if you can get him down off that
cloud they got him on."
He's lucky, too, to have that cloud under
him, because he really has little taste for the
gritty, down-to-earth politicking it normally
takes to survive at home and conquer in
Washington. He doesn't chew cut with the
snuff-dippers back in Arkansas, but he's"
never been a member of the inner "club" in
the Senate?nor much wanted to be?despite
his prestige and seniority. In fact, not a few
of his colleagues in the Senate view him as a
cold and scornful figure, a bit of a cynic, a
lot of "a loner," dourly impatient with most
lesser mortals?or, in Harry Truman's suc-
cinct phrasing, an "overeducated Oxford
s.o.b."
There may be a touch or two of truth in
that indictment, but the only part of it that
could solidly be called a fact is Oxford. He
did go there for three years as a Rhodes
scholar, from 1925 to 1928, though he prefers
to think of that experience as a sort of per-
sonal liberation rather than any detriment
to his character. It freed him of the local
countryside and provided that grounding in
the greater world which ultimately?if not
exactly at that moment ("All I did at Ox-
ford," he claims, "is have a hell of a good
time?played games and studied the mini-
mum")?led to his commanding interest in
foreign affairs.
"Remember, I'd never been anywhere to
speak of," he explains. "I'd never been to
New York or San Francisco or Washington
or any of those places. And here I'm picked
up out of a little village at an early
age * * "?he was pushed in his studies by
his father's telling him every summer; "Go
to school, or go to work"; and washing Coke
bottles bored him?"* * * and suddenly I
go to Oxford. It has a tremendous impact
on your attitude."
The best of Europe was opened up to the
roaming hill boy within him, and he came
away from this Grand Tour and his reading of
Modern History and Political Science at Ox-
ford with a wide-eyed internationalist out-
look that, going right over the top of his
squinty mountain conservatism, gave him a
very odd expression indeed, especially in later
politics. Unreadable, practically.
Of course, it probably has to be unreadable
if he is going to make it suit all the various
interests that comprise both his Arkansas
constituency and his worldwide following.
At one extreme are those rich planters from
eastern Arkansas?far less liberal than even
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
10306 Approved For Recl r
umffs6/29 ? CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
ONA RECORD ---- SENATE May 17, 1.P66
his own people up in the Ozarks?who con-
trol huge cotton allotments and large voting
blocks, and often truck "their" Negroes to
the polls to swell a highly deliverable part of
the total vote for FULBRIGHT. (Even this is
an improvement, according to Mrs. L. C.
Bates, past president of the Arkansas NAACP.
"They used to didn't even truck 'em. They'd
be in the cotton fields when they voted 'em.")
But at the other extreme is that widespread
and admiring conclave of liberal intellectuals
who, also for possessive reasons, embrace
FULBRIGHT as more "their" senator than any-
body they ever helped elect from their own
state. His out-of-Arkansas supporters can't
vote for him?some are foreign nationals?
but they expect a lot from him, and he is
well aware of that expectation. So he is
trapped, representing east Arkansas at the
saMe time he is trying to function in some-
what the same intellectual manner as the
MP. whom Oxford University Used to send
up as its representative to the British parlia-
ment. As a result, FULBRIGHT'S voting record
is crazy-quilt, his politics are pretty much a
standoff, and his public countenance?un-
readable.
"Nobody knows where to put FULBRIGHT,"
says Jack Yingling, one of his past legisla-
tive assistants, trying to explain why the
senator's independent manner seems to an-
noy so many routine-minded politicos. "He
pops up here, he pops up there."
He popped up first in 1943 with a mere
five lines of legislation that quickly became
famous as "the Fulbright Resolution," a his-
toric gesture that put the House of Repre-
sentatives on record, even a little before the
Senate, as favoring "the creation of appro-
priate international machinery"?i.e., the
United Nations?to keep "a just and lasting
peace" after the war. Two years later he of-
fered, as a kind of "economy measure," a
plan to use counterpart funds from the sale
of war surplus overseas to finance a student
exchange program, which ended up as the
Fulbright Scholarships. He seemed to be
casting his total allegiance with those who
advocated the extension of U.S. foreign aid
programs throughout One World. But he
has since popped up as one of the sharpest
critics of "the arrogance" with which he be-
lieves the U.S. has handled the whole busi-
ness Of helping other countries, too often
forcing anti-Communist military ties upon
smaller nations, thereby blunting the posi-
tive effects of the aid and creating dangers
of U.S. entanglement that need never have
existed, e.g., in Vietnam.
On domestic issues he pops up most often
as a southern conservative, willing to fili-
buster against the repeal of the so-called
right-to-work law and able to vote against
civil rights legislation even after President
Kennedy's call to conscience in 1963?to the
chagrin of his liberal friends, who will never
convince labor that he isn't a Bourbon, or
the NAACP that he isn't a bigot. Yet the
worst political attacks upon him come from
the superpatriots of the southern right wing,
who suspect, quite correctly, that his heart
isn't really in his racial posture and who
know that his deeper convictions include a
thorough disapproval of "our national obses-
sion with Communism" and a large distrust
of the military mind, along with considerable
boggling at what it costs to keep that mind
at ease with its grim, strategic thoughts.
"He's shacked as a kid by the expense of
the military," an aide observes. He has a
gut reaction against the amount of money
that must go into building an aircraft car-
rier?money that cannot then be used to
build roads and schools in such places as
Arkansas?and he is appalled on similar
grounds at the expenditures for the space
program. ("It's one of our greatest mistakes.
X couldn't possibly have the language and
power to say that strongly enough. I've
made every effort to cut [the space] appro-
priation down. I don't care about a mild,
gentle program. But this thing just blos-
somed from nothing into five billion dol-
lars I")
On the other lnaid, he greatly admires the
World Bank for offering liberal terms under
which a smaller nation can negotiate a
generous loan?while still retaining its na-
tional pride?and he would prefer to revamp
the U.S. foreign aid program to channel most
of its millions, with no military strings at-
tached, through that multilateral instru-
ment: "I never heard anybody say, 'World
Bank, go home'"
For this high-minded approach to the
amity among nations he has been honored
with full academic pomp in country after
country as a kind of international culture
hero. But usually on these state visits he
manages to pop up at the local marketplace,
going over the fruits and vegetables and
handwork like a junketing 4-H leader. "I
like to see what they raise, what they make,"
he admits, ready to shop Fiji the same way
he would War Eagle, Ark.: "You can under-
stand then how the superiority of the West-
erner can be so offensive. Sure, we have a
hell of a lot of money and can make bombs,
but in the local markets you can see other
people showing a lot of talent too." He can
no more pass by a busy stall in any of the
world's bazaars than he can drive by a fruit
stand in the Ozarks without stopping for
apples. "Here he is," one of his speech writ-
ers remembers from a trip the senator made
to the South Pacific, "peering over his half
glasses at fresh fruit in Tahiti. And he ends
up back at the hotel with five different kinds
of mangoes."
In sum, no one position ever really quite
leads to another in the unfolding of Fin,
BRIGHT'S scattered public stands. The sena-
tor himself rather facilely explains this sit-
uation by saying, "I like to feel free to take
each issue as it comes. On many issues I
don't have an opinion, and then I'll trust
another's judgment. But that's voluntary."
However, his independence of mind also in-
volves far more complicated mental gym-
nastics. Ile happens to have remarkable
powers of preoccupation. "He tends to think
of one issue to the exclusion of all others,"
explains a member of his staff, and often such
an issue will assume the proportions of an
Intellectual crisis with him. "He usually
has about one of these a year. Last year it
was what to do about the foreign aid pro-
gram.
"This year it's the Far East." He closets
himself in his senatorial office?much the
way a student at Oxford "sports his oak" to
study for his examinations?and reads every-
thing he can lay his hands on about what's
worrying him. Also: "We bring him peo-
ple." He mulls over the problem, educating
himself in its history and all its possible
ramifications, and then finally comes out of
his darkened chambers to give a speech or
hold a hearing or offer a bill?sometimes to
do all three. By then, it is more than likely
that the issue has become uniquely identi-
fiable with him?more through his scholar-
ship than his sponsorship: he simply knows
the matter best?and sooner or later, in one
phase or another, it will acquire his name.
In fact, it is amazing the number of di-
verse matters that are named FULBRIGHT,
considering he is not generally regarded as a
mover of men or a perpetrator of events.
Things occasionally pick up his name even
though he has little or nothing to do with
them. When a letter was sent to the Presi-
dent by 15 senators expressing agreement
with FULBRIGHT'S stand on Vietnam, John-
son's aide Jake Valenti began carrying it
around the White House as "the Fulbright
letter," though it was in no way his; Va-
lenti simply grabbed that letter by the easiest
handle. In a sense FULBRIGHT'S name, with
all its past associations, has become that
kind of eponym lately. It identifies a new
mode of thinking about internationl affairs?
inquiring, from a sense of history, how a for-
eign populace may achieve its own political
maturity, free of outside prescription, in-
cluding any based too closely on the Ameri-
can experience.
Of course, not all things Fulbright are
universally popular. He has come in for
some heavy criticism about his views on
Vietnam. But there still is no doubt that
once his name is attached to a particular
position, even his boldest detractors are forced
into a grudging respect for it. He can never
be dismissed as a maverick, the way Senator
MORSE of Oregon can, even when they hold
practically the same views.
FULBRIGHT has stratagems that assure him
this respect; he is deftly courteous, even with
a needling question, and he can be deftly
elusive--even seems to enjoy being elusive--
trailing off through a series of elliptical qual-
ifying remarks that end suddenly with an
abrupt, barely related question tossed back
at his original interrogator. (He'll discuss
his practically nonexistent religious views
this way or, for that matter, anything
touching himself too closely.) But he
is also accorded genuine respect because
of the astonishing breadth of view he does, in
fact, possess.
From up on his Ozark hilltop?territory
more Pioneer West than Genteel Southern?
he really can see all the way from east
Arkansas to the farthest reaches of the
greater world and he is always very cannily
relating the one to the other. He will strike
just the right note, for instance, with a del-
egation of visiting Africans after they have
explained their difficulties, by saying, as he
did recently, that he can understand their
problems: "You're about where we were 30
years ago in Arkansas."
And, if he measures the greater world by
Arkansas, he is equally willing to measure
Arkansas by the greater world. "I come
from a very poor state," he never ceases to
reiterate, and he likes to talk about Arkansas
as if it were an underdeveloped country that
had just shaken off the yoke of Arkansas
Power and Light's oligarchical rule but still
had to depend on foreign aid. He investi-
gated the Reconstruction Finance Corpora-
tion in the early 50s, he says, to protect it
from politics, since he believed the RPC
was "the major agency for aid to the under-
developed states." He has consistently voted
for federal aid to education, although voters
in Arkansas distrusted Big Government mov-
ing in on them, becallse he believes better
schooling is clearly the one best hope for an
emergent people. "They forgave me because,
'Well, he's an old professor,'" he thinks.
But there are certain internal problems
which, he argues, no emergent people will
allow anybody from Washington to touch at
this stage in their development.
FULBRIGHT did not intervene during the
1957 integration crisis at Central High School
in Little Rock, though that incident made
Faubus' name almost infamous enough to
cancel out FuLenicxx's own around the
world. FULBRIGHT was in England at the
time, and he stayed in England for what
some caustic wits said "must have been the
second semester at Oxford." The NAACP's
Mrs. Bates for one, will never forgive him:
"I've never quite understood him. He's an
intelligent guy. Why does he have to sell his
soul and his people like that? This man has
a brain and he's shown in every way where
he stands. The majority of the liberals here
told up he wouldn't sign the Southern Mani-
festo [a pledge by southern congressmen to
fight the Court's segregation decisions]. But
he did. No. I'll listen to Faubus more than
I'll listen TO PTILBRIGHT." But FULBRIGHT,
thinking of the enfranchised among the
emergent people of Arkansas insists, "You
don't trifle with them, especially about what
concerns them socially." Congressman
Brooks Hays publicly supported school inte-
gration and was widely applauded for his
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
My 17, 19 Approved FtrcReinVARA/2RE666d3p12%7LIKR414fiR000400070009-2 10307
66
tottrage. FaLifaionT was not. But Brooks
Hays shortly lost his seat as congressman
from`Little Rock.
' FULBRIGHT personally is a gradualist who
approves of the fact that both the University
of Arkansas and Fayetteville's public schools
have been integrated. He tries to explain
his quandary by saying that he will not buck
a white majority "in a matter of this deep
interest, in an area where they have knowl-
edge and experience equal or superior to my
own." With this rather flimsy justification,
FULBRIGHT rides out any and all criticism of
his votes against civil rights, arguing that it
is simply a question of hs political survival.
He insists he is then left free to go against his
constituents on matters where their knowl-
edge and experience are not equal to his
own?on foreign aid, for instance, for which
he originally voted, "even though I felt they
did. oppose it, because they thought they
needed it [aid] more."
Lately, however, FULDRIGHT has been won-
dering if his own people in Arkansas
couldn't have done a better job with U.S.
foreign policy than anybody in the federal
'government, including himself. "Maybe
their instincts about foreign aid were right,"
he ponders. "As you know, I've been having
second thoughts myself. After all, how did
we get mixed up in Vietnam? You could
say this whole thing started out of an aid
program."
That was a long time ago, however, and
his own tardiness in taking cognizance of the
situation in Vietnam causes him considera-
ble chagrin. FULBRIGHT remembers Vietnam,
?from the Ws, as "a very small operation.
I wasn't at all concerned. I was entirely
preoccupied with Europe. I don't recall
we ever had a hearing on Vietnam." But
early this year FuLenionx sported his oak for
another period of intense study?"a Europe
man" setting out to learn a whole new field:
the other side of the world?and when he
came out again, he started a long series of
hearings that eventually brought him to
? some grim conclusions of his own.
In Vietnam he feels that the U.S., at
worst, inherited the position already lost by
the French in an abandoned colonial war;
or that, at best, we interfered misguidedly
in a civil struggle that might have resolved
itself sooner had the U.S. not intervened.
The Communist involvement in the war is
not, for FuLsaionT, the deciding factor; and,
indeed, he is doubtful about that whale
line of reasoning: "Everytime somebody calls
it [a people's movement] `Communist,' it's
reason for intervention." He's convinced
this approach has caused the U.S. to initiate
too many mistaken troop movements?par-
ticularly into the Dominican Republic not
too long ago?and that's "another thing
that poisons me in this direction."
Moreover, FULLBRIGHT feels that something
is basically wrong when the U.S. can become
so inextricably involved in the woes of a tiny
country like Vietnam that a land war with
China looms as a larger threat to the world
than ever did the most painful destiny the
tiny country might have found for itself:
"I'm ashamed that the United States?a big,
magnamimous country is picking on the
little countries, trying to squash 'em. Why
don't we challenge Russia or China directly,
if that's how we feel?" He has now come to
suspect that what has happened is that the
U.S. has gone into too many areas of the
world with an abundance of good intention
all wrapped up in aid to 83 developing coun-
tries-83 possible sources of commitment,
and subsequent overbearance?and that one
? or another of these ties was bound to ensnare
us in an unwanted conflict. He has sup-
ported foreign aid and since the proposal of
the IVIarshall Plan in 1947; but, "Back when
all this started, I didn't think the United
States would be so arrogant about it."
That, for PULBRIGHT, is the abiding error.
As one of his staff puts it, he has "a strong
distadte for the destructive psychological ef-
fects of the donor and the suppliant.
That's at the core of his reasoning. You
don't humiliate people. He appreciates the
pride a little country has in telling off a big
country."
Indeed, FULBRIGHT feels that the best hope
for peace lies in reaching some general ac-
commodation with Communist China so as
to save the little countries of Southeast
Asia neutrally whole, and he has gone on
the Senate floor to argue that position.
So far, nobody has exactly leaped to the
support of his proposals and, indeed, nothing
of FULBRIGHT'S vigorous dissent from Ad-
ministration policy has yet emerged as any-
thing concrete, even from his own commit-
tee. The President is still the power
broker: "As long as he's there and there's a
two-to-one majority, he's running the show.
He has control of this Congress, including
my committee. I have a lot of the younger
members with me, but they're afraid to ex-
pose themselves. They know they can be
gutted," FULBRIGHT uncomfortably lacked
committee support even for an amendment
to the Vietnam aid appropriation that would
have dissociated the Senate from any im-
plied approval of Johnson's present course
of action.
? "I hate like hell to be in the minority," he
admits. "It does give me pause." But it's
far from a new position for him, and he has
always had the inner resources to last it out
until he is proven right or wrong. Actually
he is really at his best when he is unhesi-
tatingly outspoken.
"One thing you damn soon find out," re-
calls one faculty member who knew him at
the university as a teacher, "and that's what
BILL FULBRIGHT feels." It's something he gets
partly from the Ozarks, but it's also some-
thing he gets from having been a professor.
When he speaks out, he sounds almost as if
he were exercising tenure as much as his
rights as a senator. His dissents from ma-
jority opinion seem almost scholarly obli-
gations?as if he wanted to offer a lesson
in civics, full of learned references, as much
as set down his own opinion. On such oc-
casions he is especially prone to quote Alexis
de Tocqueville, the traveling Frenchman who
more than a hundred years ago analyzed the
intellectual danger of too much conformist
thinking in this country in his classic, De-
mocracy in America. "De Tocqueville says
things so much better than I could. About
the tyranny of the majority. I always have
the feeling that book could have been written
about America 10 years ago."
Ten years or so ago FULBRIGHT was quoting
Tocqueville in his at-the-time lonely pub-
lic opposition to Senator Joseph R. McCar-
thy, whose tactics violated?above all else,
for FuLsafoxr?"the code of the gentleman
that our democratic society presupposes."
FULBRIGHT has always believed that decent
conduct within the Senate, one member to-
ward another, is needful for its survival; and
when the majority of senators didn't at first
seem to find this true, he vigorously, dis-
sented. It is still the vote in which he takes
the most pride, the only nay that was cast
against the appropriations for McCarthy's
investigation in 1954. The Ozark part of it
was that FULBRIGHT didn't actually make up
his mind to do so until he was on the Senate
floor and McCarthy insisted on a roll-call
vote.
"That put the clincher on it," Jack Ying-
ling remembers. "FuLsniorrr was damned
if he was going to be on record as voting for
it."
The professorial part was that he promptly
rose to speak against? the "swinish blight" of
anti-intellectualism?and from time to time
thereafter dropped quotations from the
Bible and Jonathan Swift into the CON-
GRESSIONAL RECORD as gibes at McCarthy's
loutishness and smear tactics. FULBRIGHT
considered McCarthy to be "like an animal."
McCarthy kept up a noisy stream of abuse
against "Senator Half-Bright"; but FUL-
BRIGHT waited him out, standing up as the
only one willing to be counted, until other
senators gradually joined him in sufficient
number to pass the censure motion that
toppled McCarthy. ("This idea that every-
thing is done by an 'inner group,'" an old
congressional hand scoffs. "What they do,
they're forced to do by people like FUL-
BRIGHT.") The senator has been a whipping
boy for the right wing ever since; and
whenever he stirs up another ruckus over
superpatriotism, as he did in 1961 with a
memorandum to Secretary of Defense Mc-
Namara concerning military sponsorship of
civilian seminars in anti-Communism, the
letters pour in.
But for all its intellectual flair, his clash
with McCarthy really lacked the majestically
banked thunder of his loftier disagreements
with presidents of the United States, which
have almost become a habit with him. So
far, he has crossed every Chief Executive of
the last two decades at least once: Truman
over RFC scandals, Eisenhower over Dulles'
Middle East policies, and Kennedy over the
Bay of Pigs invasion.
Indeed, FULBRIGHT may have been slow in
getting around to crossing Johnson, and he
has been criticized for that. If he was so
opposed to U.S. involvement in Vietnam,
why did he act as floor manager in August,
1964, for the Bay of Tonkin resolution, which
Johnson has used ever since as a color of
congressional authority to take "all neces-
sary steps" to repeal aggression?
"I was derelict there," FULBRIGHT admits,
another result of his tardy realization of the
true situation in Southeast Asia. "It- would
probably have been healthy to have gone into
conference and had some discussion. But
Goldwater had just been nominated. You
know how the lines were drawn."
FULBRIGHT was for L.B.J. "publicly and
privately"?much closer to Johnson than he
had ever been to any previous President.
Truman and FULBRIGHT are friends now, but
that was hardly the case when FULBRIGHT
was investigating influence peddling in the
RFC. Kennedy?or the Kennedys, really?
he'd never gotten to know; they struck him as
a cold lot. Stevenson was much more his can-
didate; and then, for reasons of long friend-
ship and some mutual understanding,
Johnson. They used to sit next to each other
in the Senate when Johnson was majority
whip, and Johnson invariably deferred to
FULBRIGHT on foreign policy matters: "See
Bill. He's my Secretary of State." In return,
FULBRIGHT looked upon Johnson as "a politi-
cal genius," backed him for the presidential
nomination in 1960 and campaigned strongly
for him in Arkansas against insurgent Gold-
waterism two years ago.
But they are really antipodal human be-
ings, and even back in their days together in
the Senate there was a fatal indication of
what would eventually happen in FUL-
BRIGHT'S realization that "Johnson just wants
to pass bills?he doesn't care what's in them"
and in Johnson's impatience with FUL-
BRIGHT'S inability at Foreign Relations Com-
mittee meetings to "for ? settle it"
in time to get home for supper.
A split was bound to come between the
man interested in substance and the man of
politics. The issue turned out to be Fur,-
BRIGHT'S dissent over U.S. intervention in the
Dominican Republic: "I was reluctant to do
it. I'd had preferred that an opposition
member do it. But they're all for him. My
final consideration was, here's all of Latin
America wondering about us. Somebody
ought to give the other point of view."
FULBRIGHT tried to couch his speech of last
September as a criticism of bad advies given
the President, but it still made Johnson
furious. Afterward, besides delivering a
series of petty social snubs, Johnson lessened
any meaningful communication with FUL-
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
10308 Approved For RVamiggiNti WINFIS7_130s0g6ATB0400070009-2
May 17, 1'66
BRIGHT on foreign policy down to a _point
where he conferred in whispers with Dean
Rusk during the entire time that FULBRIGHT
Made his last effort to propound his views
on Vietnam at a White House meeting of the
congressional leadership.
"I have to defend my position whether I
like doing it or not," Tautness's said just
before beginning the public hearings on
Vietnam late in January. But he has man-
aged to accomplish something more than
significant than that. He has used the
pressure within Congress for an open air-
ing of the whole range of U.S. foreign pol-
icy--pressure that has come particularly
from younger members of both houses?to
pull the Foreign Relations Committee to-
gether again after several frustrating years
of chronic absenteeism and foundering
morale.
"We were always so plagued by the for-
eign aid bill," he explains. "That cursed
thing took up three quarters of our time.
No member really liked it. They were bored
with it. It about destroyed the spirit of the
committee."
But from the beginning the policy hear-
ings revived everybody's spirits, including
Ftrutamsrs's?at one particularly low point,
he had thought of resigning from his chair-
manship?in part because he allowed the
Vietnam hearings to develop in a much freer
style than is normally his custom.
.In the attempt to debate Vietnam and
understand our China policy, FULBRIGHT
threw a heavy burden upon other senators
during their allotted 10 minutes of ques-
tioning. Much to his delight, most of them
came forward with informed contributions.
"I've never seen them enter into it so
deftly," FULBRIGHT says of his colleagues. "I
was surprised by the intelligence of some of
their questions. They were extraordinarily
good.' The whole exercise brought the For-
eign Relations Committee out of its intel-
lectual doldrums to serve once more as the
classic American forum for probing?and,
Indeed, doubting?presidential certainties
about foreign policy, whether they are Wil-
son's Fourteen Points or Johnson's.
This is a considerable accomplishment for
FULBRIGHT--and much in line with his de-
sire to substitute "new realities" for "old
myths" which he believes Americans learned
too Well during their Cold War childhood--
but It has not been without its political
hardships. Despite his penchant for privacy,
he is not immune to the deliberate coldness
with which he is being treated by the White
House, where his intransigence is being met
with a policy of containment and isolation.
Also, there has been some speculation as to
how well that cloud his constituents have
him on would hold up back home, what with
Faubus, his eye on 1968, trying to fan it
down with outbursts against FULBRIGHT'S
hampering the war effort.
But Arkansans, for some reason, seem to
be equally proud of both Faubus and PIM-
BRIGHT these days, and nobody back home
wants to see a confrontation that would lose
Arkansas either one or the other. FULBRIGHT
can pretty much depend upon their many
mutual backers doing everything over the
next couple of years to keep them well apart,
despite Faubus' obvious wish to. close with
him in mortal combat.
Beside, it's nearly impossible to bring But
FULI3RIGHT to care much about that kind of
danger anyhow. "Maybe you can say I've
been here long enough not to give a goddam,"
he says, almost apologizing for his perseves-
ence in the hearings. But the matter goes
much deeper than that, Carl Marcy, staff di-
rector of the Foreign Relations Committee,
can tell if he's off base in any suggestion he
offers if FULBRIGHT snaps back at him: "But
you're giving me political advice!" The Sen-
ator doesn't want it. Often, when told some-
thing isn't good politics, he'll reply, "Wait
two or three years. It will be."
"His is the approach of reason," a long-
time associate cenellIdes, "and if it doesn't
appeal to his reason, it doesn't appeal to him
at all."
But that does not mean that Fussaresa'S
reason is a cold, purely cerebral kind of in-
strument. It is actually just the opposite:
a bit old-fashioned, the kind of reason as-
sociated with Edmund Burke's great 18th
Century political appeals for liberty within
tradition and limited human circumstance.
"I do have a habit of liking old things," Fun-
Bassist smiles. "Old cars, old shoes, old
wives." He's had the same Mercedes for 10
years and won't paint it because then he'd
have to worry about scratching the paint.
One pair of shoes from London he wore
for 30 years, and "I means," says one Ar-
kansan who greatly admired them, "they
were all cracks." And Betty, the senator
says, is part of that feeling of security he's
always had, so that "It never bothered me
that I might be defeated." Reason, he feels,
is the force by which such little instances of
human feeling are kept politically alive,
wherever possible, in a dangerously grace-
less world. "He finds it increasingly difficult
to understand these grandiose abstractions
about society," one staff man observes.
"He'll often oppose some particular ap-
proach to a problem simply because 'No-
body says anything about people being in-
volved.'"
He is very much people himself, right
down to his foibles. Ever since his father's
early death, his own mortality has worried
him, and at 61 he follows a strict regimen
that includes constitutionals before break-
fast and bloodletting games of golf. ("Sink-
ing that putt," says his wife, "is a pas-
sionate thing with him.") Lots of times he
doesn't think anybody near and dear to
him has a grain of sense, and he lectures
them at length and accordingly. He can be
as tight as a burr with money. "I'll tell
you something," one Arkansas millionaire
says, "if both his legs were cut off at the
knee and you offered him yours for a nickel,
he wouldn't have no use for 'em." And he
has his petty moments?even during public
hearings when his dislike of generals some-
times escapes his taut courtesy. Yet, with
all these personal quirks, he retains a re-
markable simplicity?"the kind of simplic-
ity," as one staff man puts it, "that is beyond
sophistication."
A story is told of Fulbright's trip to Naples
In 1962 to participate in some ceremonies of
acclaim for his student-exchange program,
during a time when the U.S.S. Forrestal hap-
pened to be gaudily and mightily in port.
The aircraft carrier seemed to attract any
number of junketing congressmen that
spring?mostly those concerned with mili-
tary appropriations?and FULBRIGHT hap-
pened to run into a party of them in a
Neapolitan square one clay. They tried to
drag him along to visit this vast tonnage of
floating American glary, but he insisted his
own business lay down a different street?at
the binational center where American "Ful-
brights" gather with Italian students to carry
on the important business of simply hearing
each other out, much the way he himself
once did at Oxford. Finally, after he'd po-
litely put off the congressmen and turned
back in the direction of the cultural center,
he shook his head and said to one of his
staff, "Those fellas just don't know where
the real power is."
To come out with a statement like that,
FULBRIGHT had to put a lot of what normally
passes for sophistication far behind him.
But he is more than willing to do so. Indeed,
he anxiously searches for ways in which "the
real power" can be brought to bear upon
problems that so far have not been solved
by such mighty exhibits as the U.S.S. For-
restal. He wants people to begin to "think
the 'unthinkable,? to search among what he
terms realistic, if unsettling, alternatives?
and not solely among soothing myths--"to
find some rational way other than war to
settle problems."
"I don't for a moment think that we'll get
rid of all wars," he cautions. "We'll have
to accept the fact that there are going to
be local wars and then try to be very dis-
criminating about them." Even that, how-
ever, will take more patience than he is at
all sure?following De Tocqueville's ancient
doubts about a democracy's handling of for-
eign policy?Americans can summon up.
"FULBRIGHT has a pretty modest conception
of what you can do," says another aide, ''but
he will take great satisfaction in a modest
achievement." And he does indeed take
great satisfaction in the modest achieve-
ments of the past few months, stilling which
he feels committee witnesses have helped
Americans become a lot more "discriminat-
ing" about "a local war" in Southeast Asia.
The question, then, naturally arises
whether FULBRIGHT should be satisfied with
this modest achievement. Should he per-
haps attempt to become more than a
thoughtful critic: a forceful critic and, for
once, go after support for his position in-
stead of waiting, as he always has, for in-
terested parties to come to him?
That would go against his whole nature.
It is hard to imagine him at the head of
anything so formal-sounding as a Loyal Op-
position, even if its objectives were the em-
bodiment of his own thinking. His impress,
on the contrary, continues to depend upon
his utter independence, which allows him
to raise a voice that carries great influence,
if little?or no?power in the deliberations
of the Senate.
"It's sort of like the inventor and the
manufacturer," an aide says. FULBRIGHB
helped invent the McCarthy censure, for in-
stance, but he was only minimally involved
In its eventual manufacture. "It's the ma-
chinery that runs the Senate," FULBRIGHT
Insists, and he wants never to be a part of
a machine. In fact, there is an inherent
repulsion within him against the whole
modern mechanization of human affairs, such
as to lead him to protest against something
as big as a moon shot or as minor as the
replacement of the commodious old wicker
cars in the Senate subway by a clanking
train.
"A man has to act within the possibilities
of his own personality," says a close aide,
"and FULBRIGHT is a private man. He could
do more to solicit support. But he doesn't,
partly because he' thinks it's bad taste to
bother people. If they like what. he says,
they'll say so." But this same aide admits
that he himself is worried sometimes by
the senator's political quietude and has
pressed him on occasion about the possible
disappointment he may give his loyal ad-
herents everywhere in the world. Should
he not possibly face up to the inevitable
obligations of his clear private thinking: to
leadership? "When you talk to him about
that, he squirms," the aide says. But he
notices one small sign of concession: "I don't
really get the idea he wants me to stop
talking."
The PRESIDING Orr ICER (Mr. FELL
In the chair). The Chair recognizes the
Senator from Florida.
ACCREDITATION OF THE U.S. NAVAL
ACADEMY
Mr. HOLLAND. Mr. President, some
weeks ago I was appointed by the Vice
President as a member of this year's
Board of Visitors to the U.S. Naval
Academy at Annapolis. In addition to
distinguished members of the Board
from the House of Representatives and
from academic and other groups, I had
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
-7k -
10240
Approved For LtIctmtAli5J419 c
itAblitymmtmetwoo400070009irgay 17, 1966
The evidence further demonstrates that
the aggression by North Vietnam against
South Vietnam (the Republic of Vietnam)
had been going on unabashedly since the
signing of the Geneva Accords and that
North Vietnam had consistently violated
those accords from their inception. An of-
ficial State Department report recites:
"While negotiating an end to the Indo-
china War at Geneva in 1954, the Commu-
nists were making plans to take over all
former French territory in Southeast Asia,
When Viet-Nam was partitioned, thousands
of carefully selected party members were or-
dered to remain in place in the South and
keep their secret apparatus intact to help
promote Hanoi's cause. Arms and ammuni-
tion were stored away for future use." 4
It is important to bear in mind that neither
the Republic of (South) Vietnam nor the
United States is a party to the Geneva Ac-
cords, and that while the United States par-
ticipated in the discussions leading up to the
accords, it did not sign the final declaration.
However, during the last plenary session of
the Geneva Conference on July 21, 1954, Un-
der Secretary of State Walter Bedell Smith,
head of the United States delegation, said in
an official statement that his Government
"would view any renewal of the aggression
in violatic of the aforesaid agreements With
grave concern and as seriously threatening
international peace and security".?
On September 8, 1954, just a few weeks
after the Geneva Accords were executed, the
Southeast Asia Collective Defense (SEATO)
Treaty was signed. Parties to it were the
United States, Great Britain, Australia, New
Zealand, Thailand, Pakistan and the Philip-
pines. The United States Senate ratified the
treaty an February 1, 1955, by a vote of 82
to 1.8 It took effect on February 19, 19558
Paragraph 1 of Article IV of the SEATO
Treaty provides that each party thereto "rec-
ognizes that aggression by means of armed
attack in the treaty area 8 against any of the
Parties or against any State or territory which
the Parties by unanimous agreement may
hereafter designate, would endanger its own
peace and safety, and agrees that it will in
that event act to meet the common danger
in accordance with its constitutional proc-
esses".? By a protocol to the treaty executed
on the same day, the parties "unanimously
designate [d] for the purposes of Article
IV . . . the free territory under the jurisdic-
tion of the State of Vietnam".10
The SEATO Treaty was made by the parties
in a reiteration of "their faith in the pur-
poses and principles set forth in the Charter
of the United Nations",'1 nothing in which,
according to Article 52 thereof, "precludes
the existence of regional arrangements or
agencies for dealing with such matters re-
lating to the maintenance of international
peace and security as are appropriate for re-
gional action . . .". Article 53 of the char-
ter provides that "no enforcement action
funds to continue this beneficent
program.
I consider that administration officials
Are 100 percent wrong in deciding against
direct funding of the National Defense
Education Act loan program for college
students. I am hopeful that Congress
will overrule this unwise decision so that
sons and daughters from families lackin
financial resources will not meet discrim
ination in seeking out higher educa 'o
and the advantages that go along w'
THE LEGALITY OF THE UNI ED
STATES POSITION IN VIETNAM
Mr. LONG of Louisiana . Mr. Presi-
dent, in the current issue of the American
Bar Association Journal an article ap-
pears which should be read by all Mem-
bers of the Senate. It is written by Eber-
hard P. Deutsch, of New Orleans, an out-
standing member of the bar whom I have
admired for many years.
Mr. Deutsch has written this article
in connection with his role as chairman
of the ABA Committee on Peace and Law
Through United Nations. It was in that
same capacity in February of this year
that he presented to the house of dele-
gates the resolution affirming the legality
of the United States role in Vietnam.
That body approved the resolution and it
has appeared earlier in the RECORD, but
I should like to have it appear again, and
I ask unanimous consent that it be
printed immediately at the conclusion of
my remarks.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
(See exhibit 1.)
Mr. LONG of Louisiana. In his arti-
cle entitled "The Legality of the U.S.
Position in Vietnam," Mr. Deutsch pre-
sents the reasoning which lay behind the
conclusions represented by the February
resolution. Although the text of the
article has no official standing so far as
the ABA is concerned, it bears this nota-
tion by the editors:
Reviewing the history of developments in
and concerning the ,Southeast Asia area since
1954, Mr. Deutsch demonstrates the sound-
ness of the position taken by the House of
Delegates of the American Bar Association
last February?that the position of the
United States in Vietnam is legal under in-
ternational law and in accordance with the
Charter of the United Nations and the South-
east Asia Treaty.
Mr. President, I shall not attempt to
summarize the supporting evidence
which the article presents. Mr. Deutsch
has done a masterful job of marshalling
the arguments and his conclusions are
completely irrefutable. Any effort of
mine to recapitulate or paraphrase the
text could not do justice to the presenta-
tion of the author. I hope Senators will
take the time to read every word of it. I
ask unanimous consent that the complete
text appear in the RECORD immediately
following the text of the ABA resolution
referred to above.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
(See exhibit 2.)
EXHIBIT 1
Whereas in recent hearings before the For-
eign Relations Committee of the U.S. Senate,
It has been stated that international lawyers
are agreed that the U.S. poSition in Vietnam
is illegal and in violation of the charter of
the United Nations; and
Whereas articles 51 and 62 of the charter
sanction steps for self-defense and collective
and regional security arrangements such as
the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization to
which the United States is a party; and
Whereas in the course of these hearings, it
has been suggested that an expression on
this subject by the American Bar Association
would be appropriate: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the American Bar Association,
That the position of the United States in
Vietnam is legal under international law, and
Is in accordance with the charter of the
United Nations and the Southwest Asia
Treaty; and be it further
Resolved, That the secretary of this asso-
ciation be, and he is hereby, authorized and
directed to transmit a copy of this resolution
immediately to the chairman of the Foreign
Relations Committee of the U.S. Senate.
EXHIBIT 2
THE LEGALITY OF THE UNITED STATES POSITION
IN VIETNAM
("Reviewing the history of developments
in and concerning the Southeast Asia area
since 1954, Mr. Deutsch demonstrates the
soundness of the portion taken by the House
of Delegates of the American Bar Association
last February?that the position of the
United States in Vietnam is legal under
inte national law and in accordance with the
Charter of the United Nations and the
Southeast Asia Treaty." The Committee of
which Mr. Deutsch is chairman was one of
the sponsors of the resolution the House
adopted.)
(By Eberhard P. Deutsch, chairman of the
American Bar Association Committee on
Peace and Law Through United Nations)
By the Geneva accords of 1954, the corn-
mande:s in chief of the French Union Forces
in Indochina, on the one hand, and of the
People's Army of Vietnam, on the other,
established the 17th parallel as the military
demarcation line between North and South
Vietnam, with a demilitarized zone on each
side of the line. They stipulated that the
armed fo_ces of each party were to respect
the demilitarized zone and the territory of
the other zone, and that neither zone was to
be used "for the resumption of hostilities or
to further an aggressive policy."1 The ac-
cords additionally provided for the creation
of an International Commission, composed of
India (chairman), Poland and Canada, to
supervise the agreements.?
In 1962 the International Commission re-
ported, with approval, findings of its Legal
Committee to the effect that "there is evi-
dence to show that arms, armed and unarmed
personnel, munitions and other supplies have
been sent from the Zone in the North to the
Zone in the South with the objective of sup-
porting, organizing and carrying out hostile
activities, including armed attacks, directed
against the Armed Forces and Administra-
tion of the Zone in the South", and that the
People's Army of Vietnam "has allowed the
Zone in the North to be used for inciting,
encouraging and supporting hostile activ-
ities in the Zone in the South, aimed at the
overthrow of the Administration in the
South".?
1 Agreement on the Cessation of Hostilities
in Viet Nam, IC/42/Rev. 2, July 20, 1954 (the
first of the Geneva Accords. The others, not
immediately relevant, dealt with Laos and
Cambodia respectively) , Art. 19.
2 Id., Chap. VI, Arts. 29, 34 et seq.
Special Report of the International Com-
mission for Supervision and Control in Viet
Nam, Saigon, June 2, 1962, para. 9; reprinted
in Hearings Before the Senate Foreign Rela-
tions Committee on S. 2793, 89th Cong., 2d
Sess. 736 (1966), hereinafter cited as Hear-
ings. The Polish delegation dissented.
4 Aggression from the North, 52 DEPT STATE
BULL. 404, 421 (1965).
831 DEP'T STATE BULL. 162-163 (1954).
6 101 Cone. REC. 1060 (1955).
16 U.S.T. & O.I.A. 81, T.I.A.S. No. 3170.
The treaty is reproduced in 101 CONG. REC.
1049 (1955) and in STAFF OF SENATE COMM.
ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, 89th CONG., 2D Sass.,
BACKGROUND INFORMATION RELATING TO
SOUTHEAST ASIA AND VIETNAM 70-74 (Comm
Print 1966).
8 Southe,ast Asia and the Southwest Pacific,
Article VIII.
?Execution of the treaty by the United
States was "with the understanding that its
recognition of the effect of aggression and
armed attack and its agreement with refer-
ence thereto in Article IV, paragraph 1, apply
only to communist aggression . . .". apra
nate 7, signatory clause.
18 The protocol is annexed to the treaty.
"-Prefatory clause.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29.: CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070009-2
May 17, /966Approved Forftaking16/29 ? CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
IONAL nECORD ? SENATE
such project completed in our State.
Presently five more such projects are un-
der construction under an authorized
statewide reservoir program, which totals
well over one-half billion dollars and is
about 60 percent complete.
Kansans can well be proud of the fine
progress that is being made in our State
in the control of water runoff for bene-
ficial uses. We can also be proud of the
fact that during recent years water con-
servation programs in our State have
been carried on at a much higher rate
than the national average. The future
growth and development of Kansas will
be largely determined by the amount of
water we can impound for the use of our
citizens.
I ask unanimous consent that the ad-
dress delivered by General Cassidy at the
dedicatory ceremonies be printed in the
RECORD at this point.
There being no objection, the address
Was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
CHIEF ENGINTMRS DEDICATES COUNCIL
GROVE DAM AND RESERVOIR
(Remarks by Lieutenant General William F.
Cassidy Chief of Engineers, U.S. Army, at
the dedication, Council Grove Dam, Coun-
cil Grove, Kans., May 15, 1966)
Governor Avery, 'distinguished guests,
ladies and gentlemen. I consider it a great
privilege to participate in these ceremonies
of dedication for another fine reservoir
project in the State of Kansas. Council
Grove is one of eight such projects which
the Corps of Engineers has completed in the
Sunflower State during the past 18 years.
All of these reservoirs, which so many Kan-
sans have worked so hard to bring into being,
are proving to be important stimulants to
the growth and prosperity of the State. They
are affording millions of people substantial
protection from the devastation of floods,
and rewarding opportunities for the enjoy-
ment of a better life. With five more proj-
ects now being built, the authorized state-
wide reservoir program, which totals well
over half a billion dollars, is already more
than 60 percent complete or under con-
struction.
Two of the four reservoir projects in the
program for the control of your Grand-
Neosho basin?this and John Redmond?
have been finished, and we expect to have
Marion on the Cottonwood completed by
December of 1967. The fourth?Cedar
Point?is now in the preconstruction plan-
ning phase. So the long dreams of the peo-
ple of this basin are well along toward ful-
fillment.
Council Grove is already returning a hand-
some dividend on the investment which has
been made in it. As you know from painful
experience, this valley through the years
has been subjected to extensive flood dam-
ages?over $19 million in 1951 alone, when
236,000 acres were inundated. In that flood,
the city of Council Grove suffered damages
of nearly 34 of a million dollars. Now this
dam stands guard over the city and many
miles of good valley below it. By itself, it
protects 31,000 acres. of fertile agricultural
lands, valued, with improvements, at over
$163 million. Although there has been no
extraordinary rainfall since Council Grove
began impounding water about 18 months
ago, it is so far credited with preventing
damages of $200,000, which is close to the
annual average expected during its life-
time. When the four reservoir system has
been completed, serious flooding will be sub-
stantially reduced throughout the basin.
Annual flood control benefits will be almost
$31/2 million.
No. 81--3
Storage of flood flows in reservoir projects
such as this is the key function in water
resources development. It provides the pri-
mary answer both to problems caused by
too much water and those caused by too
little. Water impounded in flood time so
that it will not destroy life and property
is available later for whatever beneficial
uses we wish to make of it.
More than 24,000 acre-feet of the capacity
of Council Grove reservoir is earmarked for
the conservation of water to meet future
municipal and industrial needs of Council
Grove and Emporia. The controlled release
of water will also be an important factor
in maintaining acceptable water quality?
reducing the concentration of residual pol-
lutants discharged into the river from var-
ious sources.
One of the basic objectives of our nation-
wide water resources development program
is to help meet the increasing demand for
healthful outdoor recreational opportuni-
ties, which are becoming more and more
important to the wellbeing of the American
people in this complex age. Council Grove,
like the other reservoirs which have been
built in Kansas, contributes substantially to
meeting this need. An investment of al-
most half a million dollars has been made
in recreational improvements. Visitors here
find good access roads, boat launching
ramps, camping and picnic grounds and
other conveniences. Up to December of last
year, 180,000 people had visited the project.
We estimate that annual attendance at this
new scenic lake will reach half a million in
1967, which will represent a very handsome
extra economic dividend for nearby com-
munities.
In addition to affording primary protec-
tion to life and property, and other tangi-
ble benefits, flood control facilities such as
this are major stimulators and aids to beau-
tification. Floods create blight and ugliness
on the American scene. When there is
nothing better to look forward to than an-
other flood, the incentive to invest in the
improvement and beautification of property
is diminished or lost entirely. Effective
flood control changes all that, because people
are able to build and beautify for the fu-
ture with confidence that their work will not
be in vain.
Kansas is one of the leaders in our na-
tiOnwide effort to devolp and put to bene-
ficial use our precious and limited water re-
sources. During recent years the water
conservation program here has been booming
at a rate considerably higher than the na-
tional average, which is a great tribute to
the foresight and energy of your State's
leadership. Over the last decade, annual
expenditures by the Corps of Engineers
throughout the country have doubled.
Comparative expenditures in Kansas were
more than fivefold greater in 1965 than they
were ten years ago. And, of course, these
expenditures relate to only a part of your
state-wide development program.
Although so much has been accomplished,
much more remains to be done thronghout
the State. For one thing, 11 of your 24 active
authorized reservoir projects remain to be
started, although we are now engaged in
preconstruction planning on five of them.
The timely completion of this program will
be of immense value to all the people of
the State.
I foresee that the Kansas Water Plan,
adopted last year, will be an increasingly
important factor in the coordinated, orderly,
and full development of the State's water re-
sources at all levels of effort during years to
come. Kansas is fortunate to have such a
far-reaching and comprehensive blueprint
for action.
I want particularly to compliment on this
occasion all of the public-spirited citizens
whose cooperative effort and faith in the
future have carried forward the vital pro-
\ 10239
gram for the development of the Grand-
Neosho basin. Among others have been the
members and leaders, past and present, of
the prime-moving Neosho-Cottonwood Flood
Control Association; the members of your
Congressional delegation, who have so ef-
fectively supported Council Grove and the
other elements of the basin system, and your
former Congressman and present chief ex-
ecutive, Governor Avery.
Special tribute is due to the peoplc?and
I am sure many of them are present today--
who gave up much that was dear to them--
homes, farms, and businesses?to make this
conservation project possible. Your sacri-
fice was not a small one, and your reward
lies in the knowledge that your contribu-
tion will benefit a great number of people
for many, many years to come. All of those
who will enjoy a fuller life because of Coun-
cil Grove Reservoir owe you a debt of lasting
gratitude.
I offer my congratulations to the primary
contractor?the Cook Construction Company
of Hattiesburg, Mississippi?on a fine job
brought to timely completion. Compliments
are also due the Corps' area engineer here,
Frank J. Bosche; and our resident engineer,
Richard N. Palmer, for their effective super-
vision and coordination during the con-
struction period.
Council Grove Dam and Resorvoir is an-
other monument to the true American spirit
of public endeavor to serve the greatest good
of the greatest number of our people. I now
dedicate it to the achievement of that high
purpose during the years to come.
NDEA SHOULD NOT BE SHORT-
CHANGED
Mr. YOUNG of Ohio. Mr. President,
in 1958 Congress enacted the National
Defense Education Act. One of its major
provisions was direct financial assistance
to college students under which a student
may borrow up to $5,000 during his en-
tire college career or an annual maxi-
mum of $1,000. Loans are granted on
the basis of ability and need.
Students who lacked financial re-
sources, but possessed good academic po-
tential, could borrow money from the
Federal Government and pay it back at
low interest rates over a reasonable
period of time.
The National Defense Education Act
was a boon to many youngsters from poor
families who desired a college education
but could not afford one. Now, with the
Vietnam conflict costing billions of tax-
payers' dollars, the administration h.as
decided to place the responsibility for
these loans on the private credit market.
Given the limited amount of money that
private institutions have to loan out, it
is a very real possibility that students
from well-to-do families will be preferred
over youngsters from families lacking
financial resources.
Estimates reveal that more than 17,000
college students in Ohio alone will re-
quire financial assistance to continue
their education. It is disheartening that
many of these students may not be able
to receive needed assistance simply be-
cause they come from poor families or
because other applicants have a better
credit rating.
Mr. President, I am hopeful that the
administration request to slash appropri-
ations for the National Defense Educa-
tion Act will be denied and that the Con-
gress will appropriate the necessary
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
10242 Approved Forastmainta9 itiatWEIHR4Aliq000400070009gay 17, 17.0
tional determination that all such attacks
will be met, and that the United States will
continue in its basic policy of assisting the
free nations of the area to defend their free-
dom." And the President forthrightly re-
quested that Congress adopt "a resolution
expressing the support of the Congress for all
necessary action to protect our armed forces
. . . and to defend freedom and preserve
peace 'in Southeast Asia in accordance with
the obligations of the United States under
the Southeast Asia Treaty."
Two days later, on August 7, in response to
-this message from the President, Congress
adopted the resolution quoted above, and on
August 10 the President signed it as Public
Law 88-408.0
Article 51 of the Charter of the United
Nations, which provides that "nothing in the
present Charter shall impair the inherent
right of individual and collective self-de-
fense", requires that "measures taken by
Members in the exercise of this right of self-
defense shall be immediately reported to the
Security Council . . .". That the Southeast
Asia Collective Defense Treaty was made
under and in accordance with the Charter of
the United Nations, particularly Article 51,
is evidenced by the provision of paragraph
1 of Article IV of the treaty (by which each
party agreed to participate in defending acts
of aggression in the treaty area), that "meas-
ures taken under this paragraph shall be
immediately reported to the Security Council
of the United Nations".
On August 5, 1964, Adlai E. Stevenson,
United' States Representative to the United
Nations and the Security Council, advised
the council formally of two "deliberate armed
attacks" by North Vietnamese torpedo boats
against a naval unit of the United States on
the high seas. He declared that "these wan-
ton acts of violence and destruction" were
simply part of "the sabotage of the inter-
national machinery established to keep the
peace by the Geneva agreements?and the
deliberate, systematic and flagrant violations
of those agreements by two regimes which
signed them and which by all tenets of de-
cency, law and civilized practice are bound
by their provisions", all of which, he said,
"fit into the larger pattern of what has been
going on in Southeast Asia for the past
decade and a half".
Ambassador Stevenson assured the Security
Council that "we are in Southeast Asia to
help our friends preserve their own oppor-
tunity to be free of imported terror [and]
alien assassination, managed by the North
Viet-Nam Communists based in Hanoi and
backed by the Chinese Communists from
Peiping". He affirmed solemnly "that the
deployments of additional U.S. forces to
Southeast Asia are designed solely to deter
further aggression".0
On Ferlzsuary 7, 1965, Ambassador Steven-
son, by a letter to the President of the Secu-
rity Council, informed that body of "attacks
by the Viet Cong, which operates under the
military orders of North Vietnamese authori-
ties in Hanoi". He said the attacks were part
Of an over-all plan "to make war against the
legitimate government of South Viet-Nam"
in "violation of international law and the
Geneva Accords of 1954". He stated also that,
as required by paragraph 2 of article IV of
the Southeast Asia Treaty, the United States
and Vietnamese Governments had consulted
immediately and had agreed that it had be-
come "necessary to take prompt defensiVe
action" to resist "this continuing aggres-
sion". He reported further that the "counter
measures. . . are a jurtified measure of self-
defense" and that he was "reporting the
measures which we have taken in accordance
with our public commitment to assist the
Supra note 20.
0 51 DEVT STATE BULL. 272-.-274 passim
(1964).
Republic of Viet-Nam against aggression
from the North".21
Of particular interest at this point is the
reiterated assertion by the Lawyers Commit-
tee on American Policy Towards Vietnam,
phrased variously throughout its submission,
that "only the Security Council . . . is au-
thorized to determine the existence of any
. . . act of aggression and . . the meas-
ures to be taken to maintain OT restore inter-
national peace". 28 To the statements quoted
above, which were made by Ambassador Ste-
venson in his letthr of February 7, 1965, he
added significantly: "We deeply regret that
the Hanoi regime, in its statement of August
8, 1964, which was circulated in Security
Council Document S-5888, explicitly denied
the right of the Security Council to examine
this problem." .9
Less than three weeks later, in another
letter to the President of ;the Security
Council, Ambassador Stevenson transmitted
to that body an extensive State Dopartment
report entitled Aggression from the North:
The Record of North Viet-Nam's Campaign
To Conquer South Viet-Nam, the facts re-
cited in which, Ambassador Stevenson sub-
mitted, "make it unmistakably clear that the
character of that conflict is an aggressive
war of conquest waged against a neighbor?
and make nonsense of the cynical allegation
that this is simply an indigenous insurrec-
tion". 80
Innumerable other reports, both formal
and informal, were made to the Security
Council by the representatives of the United
States at the United Nations; and there was
even one by President Johnson on July 28,
1965, bespeaking the continued efforts of
Secretary General U Thant to find a solution
of the Vietnamese problem through the
United Nations. In the last of these reports
available as this article is written?two let-
ters of January 31, 1966, from Ambassador
Goldberg to the President of the Security
Council?it is requested "that an urgent
meeting of the Council be called promptly
to consider the situation in Viet Nam". A
draft resolution, calling "for immediate dis-
cussions without preconditions . . . among
the appropriate interested governments . . .
looking toward the application of the Geneva
accords . . . and the establishment of a dur-
able peace in Southeast Asia", was trans-
mitted with the second of these letters for
consideration by the counci1.80
"We are firmly convinced", said Ambassa-
dor Goldberg, "that in light of its obligations
under the Charter to maintain international
.1 52 DEP'T STATE Bum,. 240-241 passim
(1965).
28 Hearings, Appendix 695.
0 In a letter of July 30, 1965, from Arthur
J. Goldberg, who succeeded Ambassador Ste-
venson as our Representative to the United
Nations and the Security Council, to the
President of the Security Council, he re-
peated, in substance, this statement. Am-
bassador Goldberg said: "It is especially un-
fortunate that the regime in Hanoi . . has
denied the competence of the United Nations
to concern itself with this dispute in any
manner, and has even refused to participate
in the discussions in the Council." United
States Mission to the United Nations, Press
Release 4610, July 30, 1965.
8052 DEP'T STATE BULL. 403, 419 (1965). It
Is interesting to compare this statement by
Ambassador Stevenson with the assertion of
the Lawyers Committee on American Policy
Towards Vietnam that "Ho CM Minh can
compare his position in demanding union of
Vietnam with that of Lincoln, when Britain
and France were threatening to intervene to
assure the independence of the Confed-
eracy". Hearings, Appendix 692.
81 United States Mission to the United Na-
tions Press Releases 4798 and 4799, Janu-
ary 31, 1966.
peace and security . . . the Council should
address itself urgently and positively to this
situation and exert its most vigorous en-
deavors and its immense prestige to finding
a prompt solution to It.,, 22 Despite all prior,
and this formal, urgent submission of the
Vietnamese problem to the Security Council,
It has never taken any action of any kind
looking toward the restoration of inter-
national peace and security to Southeast
Asia. Neither has the council expressed the
slightest criticism of any action taken by the
United States in the SEATO area.0
In its memorandum in opposition to the
policy of the United States, the Lawyers Com-
mittee on American Policy Towards Vietnam
asserts that "the conduct of the United States
Government in Viet Nam appears plainly to
violate the terms of the Geneva Accords".,
While the United States is not a party to the
accords, it did by contemporaneous unilateral
declaration agree, in effect, to respect them.
But, as demonstrated above, the Geneva Ac-
cords since their inception have been violated
continuously by the Hanoi regime. It is an
accepted principle of international law that
a material breach of a treaty by one of the
parties thereto dissolves the obligations of
the other parties, at least to the extent of
withholding compliance until the defaulting
party purges its breach.0
It has been suggested that because the
power to declare war is vested by the Consti-
tution in the Congress alone, the deployment
of United States forces to Vietnam by the
President, without a formal Congressional
declaration of war, violates the constitutional
fiat. When the phrasing of this clause of the
Constitution was being considered at the con-
vention in 1787, its original form, vesting in
Congress the power to "make" war, was
changed to give it the power to "declare" war,
"leaving to the Executive the power to repel
sudden attacks"?"he should be able to repel
32 ., No. 4798.
0 Memorandum, supra note 13, page 20.
On February 2, 1966, the Security Council did
put the Vietnam question on its agenda at
the request of the United States. The vote
Was nine in favor (Argentina, China, Japan,
Jordan, the Netherlands, New Zealand,
United Kingdom, United States and Uru-
guay); two against (Bulgaria and the Soviet
Union); four abstentions (France, Mali,
Nigeria and Uganda).
Ambassadors Fedorenko of the Soviet
Union and Tarabanov of Bulgaria stated that
their governments "suppoited the position
of" North Vietnam "that the question be set-
tled within the Geneva Accords", and the
former added that the United States "was
trying to throttle the struggle of the-people
of South Viet-Nam for freedom and inde-
pendence". Ambassador Seydoux of France
insisted that the United Nations "was not
the proper framework for achieving a peace-
ful solution".
No further action has been taken by the
Security Council, but by a letter of February
26, 1966, the president of the council advised
Its members that the differences of opinion
among them as to the problem of Vietnam
had "given rise to a general feeling that it
would be inopportune for the Council to hold
further debate at this time", but "that the
Council, having decided on February 2 to
place on its agenda the item contained in the
letter of January 31 from the Permanent
Representative of the United States, re-
mained seized of the problem of Viet-Nam."
UN Monthly Chronicle, March, 1966, pages
3-10 passim.
Hearings, Appendix 702.
2 OPFEITHEIM, op. cit. supra note 17, at
136, 137. See draft Article 42 of the LAW OF
TREATIES by the International Law Commis-
sion in the report of its fifteenth session,
May 6 to July 12, 1963. U. N. GEN. Ass. OFF.
REC. 18th Sees.. Stipp. No. 9, (A/5509).
Approved For Release 2005/06/29: CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
,14017, 1966 Approved For&ftftetRRIM9KE.66-89P6749M000400070009-2
10241
shall be taken under regional arrangements
or by regional agencies without the au-
thoripti On of the Security Council . . .".
These two articles are at the head of Chapter
The preceding chapter (VII) deals with
"Action with Respect to Threats to the Peace,
Breaches of the Peace, and Acts of Aggres-
sion". The first twelve articles (39 to 50,
inclusive) of that chapter prescribe the
measures to be taken by the Security Coun-
cil to meet "any threat to the peace, breach
of the peace or act of aggression". By the
last article (51) of that chapter, it is stipu-
lated expressly that "nothing in the present
Charter shall impair the inherent right of
individual or collective self-defense if an
armed attack occurs against a Member of the
United Nations, until the Security Council
has taken measures necessary to maintain
international peace and security".
It was clearly with these provisions of
Articles 51 and 52 of the Charter of the
United Nations in mind that, in Article IV
of the SBATO Treaty, each party thereto
agreed that it would "act to meet the com-
mon danger" in the event of "aggression by
means of armed attack [anywhere] in the
treaty area" (Southeast Asia and the South-
west Pacific). "Enforcement action" is
clearly action to enforce decisions of the Se-
curity Council under Articles 39 to 50 of
Chapter VII of the charter. Equally clearly,
"enforcement action" does not include
measures of "Individual or collective self-
defense". So that when Article 53 of the
Charter provides that "no enforcement action
shall be taken under regional arrangements
. . . without the authorization of the Se-
curity Council", it does not refer to such
measures of "self-defense" as are contem-
plated under the SEATO Treaty, particularly
in light of the explicit recital of Article 51 of
the charter that "nothing in the present
Charter shall impair the inherent right of
individual or collective self-defense".
DECLARATION STATES PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT
The "Pinal Declaration of ,the Geneva Con-
ference", issued on July 21, 1954 the same
day on Which the Geneva Accords were
signed, states:
"The Conference recognizes that the es-
sential purpose of the agreement relating to
Viet Nam is to settle military questions with
a view to ending hostilities and that the mil-
itary demarcation line is provisional and
should not in any way be interpreted as
constituting a political or territorial boun-
dary." '-
It was by no means contemplated, how-
ever, that there was to be no ultimate par-
tition of Vietnam. On the contrary, the
very next article (7) of the final declaration
provided expressly that the political prob-
lems of "independence, unity and territorial
Integrity" were to be determined by free
elections, internationally supervised. That
article reads "that, so far as Viet Nam is con-
cerned, the settlement of political problems,
effected on the basis of respect for the prin-
ciples of independence, unity and territorial
integrity, shall permit the Vietnamese people
to enjoy the fundamental freedoms, guar-
anteed by democratic institutions established
as a result of free general elections by secret
ballot . . . under the supervision of an
international commission . . .
IC/43/Rev. 2, July 21, 1954; reprinted in
Baciteaouam INFORMATION, supra note 7, page
66.
',Because of the North Vietnamese aggres-
sion against South Vietnam, the contem-
plated elections were never held: "A nation-
wide election in these circumstances would
have been a travesty." Memorandum, The
Legality of United States Participation in the
Defense of Viet Nam, Department of State,
Office of the Legal Adviser, March 4, 1966,
page 33.
It will be recalled that by the protocol to
the SEATO Treaty, South Vietnam ("the
free territory under the jurisdiction of the
State of Viet Nam") was promised protec-
tion as such under the treaty. Reference
has since been made to South Viet Nam as a
"protocol state".14
In addition to the reference in the con-
temporaneous protocol to the SEATO Treaty
to "the State of Viet Nam", the Republic of
(South) Vietnam "has been recognized as
a separate international entity by approxi-
mately sixty governments around the world.
It has been admitted as a member of several
of the specialized agencies of the United
Nations. In 1957, the General Assembly
voted to recommend South Viet Nam for
membership in the United Nations, and its
admission was frustrated only by the veto
of the Soviet Union in the Security
Council." 12
The right of self-defense under Article 51
of the Charter of the United Nations is ex-
pressed to be unimpaired "if an armed attack
occurs against a Member of the United Na-
tions", and It has been asserted by opponents
of United States policy in Vietnam that this
amounts to explicit dental of such a right
In the event of attacks against nonmembers
of the United Nations. A thesis that mem-
bers of the United Nations are not permitted
to participate in collective self-defense to
repel aggression, on the ground that the
aggrieved nation is not a member of the
United Nations, can hardly be supported on
its face, in reason, logic or law." Would
proponents of this doctrine suggest that
members of the United Nations would have
no right to assist Switzerland in self-defense
against a foreign invader?
But the right to self-defense has always
existed independently of the charter,17 and
that right is recognized expressly in Article
51. It is quite obvious that the charter
merely confirms, as to members of the United
Nations, the innate right of self-defense ap-
pertaining to both members and nonmem-
bers. Article 51 expressly retains, unim-
paired, the "inherent" right of both Indi-
viduals and collective self-defense, thus
implicitly recognizing the independent ex-
istence of the right of members to come to
the aid of nonmembers in collective self-
defense against aggression, or attack "to
maintain international peace and security"?
the very first purpose of the United Nations
itself, as stated in the charter.12
On August 7, 1964, the Congress adopted,
by a vote of 88 to 2 in the Senate and 416
to 0 in the House,12 the Joint Southeast Asia
Resolution, in which the preambular clauses
recite that "naval units of the Communist
regime in Vietnam, in violation of the prin-
ciples of the charter of the United Nations
and of international law, have deliberately
and repeatedly attacked United States naval
vessels lawfully present in international
waters, and have thereby created a serious
14 See, for example, Hearings 463-465 and
Joint Southeast Asia Resolution, 78 Stat. 384,
approved August 10, 1964.
"Memorandum, supra note 13, page 12. See
also Vietnamese-United States Relations, a
joint statement issued at Washington by the
President of the United States and the Presi-
dent of Viet Nam, May 11, 1957, White House
Press Release, 36 DEP'T STATE BULL. 851-852
(1957).
la The principle that members of the
United Nations are legally entitled to partici-
pate in collective self-defense of nonmem-
bers is sustained by leading authorities on
international law. BOWETT, SELF-DEFENSE IN
INTERNATIONAL LAW 193-195 (1958); KELSEN,
THE LAW OF THE UNITED NATIONS 793 (1950)
17 OPPENHEIM, INTERNATIONAL LAW, 297 et
seq. (8th (Lauterpacht) ed. 1955); JESSUP . A
MODERN LAW OF NATIONS 163 at seq. (1948).
28 See footnote 16, supra.
22 110 CONG, REC. 18470-18471, 18555 (1964).
threat to international peace": "these attacks
are part of a deliberate and systematic
campaign of aggression" against the South
Vietnamese "and the nations joined with
them in the collective defense of their free-
dom".
The resolution then states "that the Con-
gress approves and supports the determine-
tion of the President, as Commander in
Chief, to take all necessary measures to re-
pel any armed attack against the forces of
the United States and to prevent further
aggression"; that "the United States regards
as vital to its national interest and to world
peace the maintenance of international
peace and security in Southeast Asia"; and
that "consonant with the Constitution of
the United States and the Charter of the
United Nations and in accordance with its
obligations under the Southeast Asia Col-
lective Defense Treaty, the United States is,
therefore, prepared, as the President deter-
mines, to take all necessary steps, including
the use of armed force, to assist any member
or protocol state of the Southeast Asia Col-
lective Defense Treaty requesting assistance
in defense of its freedom." 22
In an address delivered at Gettysburg,
Pennsylvania, on April 4, 1959, President
Eisenhower declared that his administration
had reached "the inescapable conclusion that
out own national interests demand some
help from us in sustaining in Viet Nam the
morale . . . and the military strength neces-
sary to its continued existence in freedom"."
In a letter of December 14, 1961, to the Presi-
dent of the Republic of Vietnam, President
Kennedy, recalling that the Communist
regime of North Vietnam had "violated the
provisions of the Geneva Accords . . . to
which they bound themselves in 1951" and
that "at that time, the United States, al-
though not a party to the Accords, declared
that it 'would view any renewal of the ag-
gression in violation of the agreements with
grave concern and as seriously threatening
international peace and security' ", assured
him that "in accordance with that deciara-
.tion, and in response to your request, we are
prepared to help the Republic of Viet Nam
. . . to preserve its independence"."
In President Johnson's message of August
5, 1964, to Congress, reporting the Commu-
nist attacks on United States' naval vessels
in the international waters of the Gulf of
Tonkin, he said:
". . . The North Vietnamese regime has
constantly sought to take over South Viet-
nam and Laos. This Communist regime has
violated the Geneva accords for Vietnam. It
has systematically conducted a campaign of
subversion, which includes the direction,
training, and supply of personnel and arms
for the conduct of guerilla warfare in South
Vietnamese territory. . . . Our military and
economic assistance to South Vietnam and
Laos in particular has the purpose of helping
these countries to repel aggression and
strengthen their independence. The threat
to the free nations of southeast Asia has long
been clear."
The Lawyers Committee on American Pol-
icy Towards Vietnam questions whether
President Johnson's deployment of United
States forces to Vietnam can "be squared
with our Constitution . . . for, contrary to
widely held assumptions, the power to snake
and conduct foreign policy is not vested ex-
clusively in the President, but is divided be-
tween him and Congress. . . ." 24 In his mes-
sage of August 5, 1964, to the Congress, Presi-
dent Johnson went on to say unequivocally
that "as President of the United States I have
concluded that I should now ask the Con-
gress on its part, to join in affirming the na-
20 78 Stat. 384, approved August 10, 1964.
2740 DEP'T STATE Butz,. 579-581 (1959).
"46 DEP'T STATE BULL. 13-14 (1962).
"51 DEP'T STATE Burn. 261-263 (1964).
24 Hearings, Appendix 704-705.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400070009-2
ppved For
camonggfoRwinia-Epjimppoo0400070009-2
kay 17, 1966Aro 10243
and not to commence war" and "to:conduct'
It whicia was an Executive function","
The President is, under Section 2 of Article
II of the Constitution, the "Commander in
Chief of the Army and Navy of the United
States". Throughout the history of the
United States, he has been deemed to have
authority to deploy the country's military
forces to trouble spots around the world,
frequently in combat. The Department of
State has a record of some 125 such in-
stances."
In the last analysis, however, the exercise
of the President's power as Commander in
Chief in deploying forces of the United States
to Southeast Asia for the defense of the
Republic of Vietnam has had the repeated
sanction of the Senate, as well as of the Con-
gress as a whole, so that, although the situa-
tion now seems unquestionably to constitute
war in its technical sense, a former Congres-
sional verbal declaration of war as such
could not conceivably be essential to clothe
the President's conduct with constitutional
validity. This Congressional sanction has
been evidenced by overwhelming majorities
in the Senate's approval of the SEATO
Treaty, in the adoption of the Joint Congres-
sional Southeast Asia resolution of August
10, 1964, and in the passage of the appro-
priations necessary to carry on the defensive
actions undertaken by the Executive.
First, as to the treaty. In it (paragraph 1,
Article IV) each of the parties "recognizes
that aggression by means of armed attack in
the treaty area against" any of them or
against the "free territory under the jurisdic-
tion of the State of Viet-nam" (protocol)
"would endanger its own peace and safety".
The "treaty area", under Article VIII, in-
cludes "the general area of the Southwest
Pacific not . . . north of 21 degrees 30
minutes north latitude". The United States
has historically owned tremendously impor-
tant and valuable strategic territorial inter-
ests in that area. Aside from its trusteeship
over the Mariana (except Guam), Marshall
and Caroline Islands, the United States owns
Guam, Wake and the Samoan group. And
yet the Lawyers Committee on American
Policy Towards Vietnam has asserted that
"SEATO is not a regional agency within the
letter or spirit of the UN Charter", because
"Articles 51 and 53 . . . envisaged regional
systems which historically and geographic-
ally developed into a regional community?
not contemplating a regional system which
fused . . . Southeast Asia with a country
of the North American Continent"?"sepa-
rated by oceans anti thousands of miles from
South East Asia"."
In the cited iktragraph of the treaty, the
United States agreed that in the event of
aggression in the treaty area it would "act
to meet the common danger". In recom-
mending ratification of the treaty to the
Senate, its Foreign Relations Committee re-
ported that "the committee is not impervious
to the risks which this treaty entails. It
fully appreciates that the acceptance of these
obligations commits the United States to a
course of action over a vast expanse of the
Pacific. Yet these risks are consistent with
our own highest interests." " The Senate rati-
fied the treaty on February 1, 1955, by a vote
of 82 to 1.40
862 FeautAnn,?RECORDS OF THE FEDERAL CON-
VENTION 318-319.
57 See State Department Position Paper pre
pared for the Senate Committee on Foreign
Relations, November 19, 1065
BACKGROUND
INFORMATION, supra note 7, at 254.
38 Hearings, Appendix 693.
a' S. REP., 84th Cong., 1st Sess. 15 (1955) .
Senator WAYNE MORSE of Oregon, as a mem-
ber of the committee, concurred in, this
report.
' 'Supra note 6. The negative vote was that
of Senator William Langer of North Dakota.
Senator MORSE voted for ratification of the
In light of all of the foregoing, it seems
difficult to find anything in the nature of an
adequate foundation for the ipse dint of
the Lawyers Committee on American Policy
Towards Vietnam that "the 'Southeast Asia
Collective Defense Treaty'?connecting the
United States with Southeast Asia, architec-
tured by Secretary of State Dulles, is a lega-
listic artificial formulation to circumvent the
fundamental limitations placed by the
United Nations Charter on unilateral actions
by individual members"."-
Undoubtedly the clearest and most un-
equivocal Congressional sanction of the
President's deployment of United States
forces for the defense of South Vietnam is
contained in the Joint Southeast Asia reso-
lution of August 10, 1964, reciting expressly
"that the Congress approves and supports
the determination of the President, as Com-
mander in Chief, to take all necessary meas-
ures to repel any armed attack against the
forces of the United States and to prevent
further aggression", and that the United
States is "prepared, as the President deter-
mines, to take all necessary steps, including
the use of armed force, to assist any member
or protocol state of the Southeast Asia Col-
lective Defense Treaty requesting assistance
in defense of its freedom"."
The Lawyers' Committee on American
Polity Towards Viet Nam quotes a passage
from an article in the Washington Daily
News of June 4, 1965, by Richard Starnes,
read into the Congressional Record by Sen-
ator ERNEST GRUENING of Alaska, which states
that the joint resoultion was "passed in the
fever of indignition that followed" the Gulf
of Tonkin attacks, and then, again as their
own ipse dixit, assert that "there is no evi-
dence that Congress thought or under-
stood that it was declaring war"."
This statement is simply incorrect. When
the President sent his message to Congress
on August 5, 1964, recommending passage of
"a resolution expresing the support of Con-
gress for all necessary action to protect our
Armed Forces and to assist nations covered
by the SEATO Treaty", he stated explicitly
that he "should now ask the Congress on
its part, to join in affirming the national
determination that all such attacks will be
met, and that the United States will con-
tinue in its basic policy of assisting' the free
nations of the area to defend their free-
dom..14
In the course of a colloquy on the floor
of the Senate on August 6, 1984, between
Senator JOHN SHERMAN COOPER of Kentucky
and Senator J. WILLIAM FULBR/GHT of Arkan-
sas, Chairman of the Foreign Relations Corn
mittee which recommended passage of the
resolution," the following discussion (ex-
cerpts) took place:
Senator COOPER. Are we now [by this re-
solution] giving the President advance au-
thority to take whatever action he may deem
necessary respecting South Viet-nam and its
defense, or with respect to the defense of any
other country included in the treaty?
Senator FULBRIGHT. I think that is cor-
rect.
Senator CO-OPER. Then, looking ahead, if
the President decided that it was necessary
to use such force as could lead us into war,
we would give that authority by this resolu-
tion?
Senator FULBRIGHT. That is the way I
would interpret it."
treaty on the floor of the Senate where he
stated, after ratification of the treaty, that
"there is no doubt in my mind that the treaty
is in conformity with the United Nations
Charter". 91 CONG. REC. 1060 (1965) .
"Hearings, Appendix sq.
02 Supra note 20.
0 Hearings, Appendix 710.
'51 DEP'T STATE Bum- 261-263 (1964).
45 S. REP., 88th Cong., 2d Sess. (1964).
" 110 CONG. REC. 18409 (1964).
?
Senator MORSE himself called the resolu-
tion "a predated declaration of war"," which
would, somewhat enigmatically, give "to
the President what I honestly and sincerely
believe is an unconstitutional power * *
to make war without a declaration of war"."
The enigma in this puzzling concept seems
to arise from the rather simple and logical
-hypothesis that the function of a legislative
"declaration of war" is to authorize the ex-
ecutive "to make war". Since, by Senator
MORSE'S own statement, the resolution au-
thorizes the President "to_ make war", it
surely has the same legal effect as a Congres-
sional "declaration of war" in. haec verba
would have had."
Actually, while two or three members of
the Senate expressed doubt as to whether
the resolution was intended to go as far as
it did, there was no real question about it.
Senator MORSE himself made extended
speeches against it, repeatedly warning his
colleagues as to its dire import, in such
words as that it "does go beyond the inherent
authority of the President to act in the self-
defense of our country and does vest in him
authority to proCeed to carry out a campaign
that amounts in fact to the waging of war".55
In the course of a 'recent debate on the
floor of the Senate on a bill for an appro-
priation in support of the military forces in
Vietnam, Senator RICHARD B. RUSSELL of
Georgia, Chairman of the Armed Forces Com-
mittee, said:
"I knew that the joint resolution con-
ferred a vast grant of power upon the Presi-
dent. It is written in terms that are not
capable of misinterpretation, and about
which it is difficult to become confused. * *
The language could not have been drawn
more clearly. Personally, I would be ashamed
to say that I did not realize what I was vot-
ing for when I voted for that joint resolu-
tion. It is only one page in length. It is
clear. It is explicit. It contains a very great
grant of power." 5'
During the hearings on that appropriation
bill before the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee on February 18, 1966, Senator
MORSE asked Secretary of State Rusk whether
he thought that the vote on the Southeast
Asia Resolution "would have been the same
if my colleagues in the Senate had contem-
plated that it might lead to 200,000 or 400,000
or 600,000 American troops in South Viet
Nam?" The Secretary replied: "I doubt very
much that the vote would be substantially
different."
In response to that, Senator MORSE com-
mented that there would be "a chance next
week to find out. * * * I intend to offer [a
rescission resolution] as an amendment to
the pending business in the Senate." 53 On
March 1 Senator MORSE offered his amend-
ment to the military appropriation bill, to
provide that the "'Joint resolution to pro-
mote the maintenance of international peace
and security in southeast Asia' * * * is
hereby repealed." 53
To avoid any question as to the effect and
meaning of a vote on his amendment, Sena-
tor MORSE himself declared that it "would be
a vote to make clear to the President that
those who vote for the amendment disap-
prove of the continuation of the exercise of
the power he has been exercising under the
Tonkin Bay resolution." 5,
Senator RUSSELL said "that the defeat of the
proposal of the Senator from Oregon by the
02 Id, at 18427.
46 Id. at 18443.
45 "When I use a word", Htunpty Dumpty
said in a rather scornful tone, "it means just
what I choose it to mean,?neither more nor
lass." CARROLL, THROUGH THE LOOKING-GLASS.
50 1 10 CONG. REC. 18443 (1964) .
" 112 Cowo. REC. 4192 (1966).
53 Hearings 591.
02112 CONG. REC. 4192 (1966).
'Id. at 4217.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400070009-2
10244 Approved-For lang8540/B ityeolyg67IWM000400070009-kay
i 7 196u
Members of the Senate * * * will leave the
original joint resolution * * unimpaired,
in full strength and vigor, and with Congress,
except for two Members of the Senate who
voted againdt the 1964 resolution, solemnly
and solidly behind the President in the steps
that he has taken in southeast Asia." "
After full debate, Senator MANSFIELD of
Montana, the majority leader, moved to
table Senator Moxsx's amendment, and the
motion was carried, 92 to 5." After some
further discussion, Senator RUSSELL moved
for passage of the appropriation bill, and his
motion carried by a vote of 93 to I"
One of the best means available to the
Congress for the control of executive action
is through the power of the purse?the ul-
timate necessity of Congressional action for
appropriations to provide funds to carry out
executive functions. As stated by Senator
MORSE during the hearings on the military
appropriation bill, "a vote on this pending
piece of business in the Senate really is a
vote as to whether or not we are going to
continue to support this program, because
the only check, one of the best checks we
have, is to say we are not going to finance
it." " As stated, the bill was passed in the
Senate by vote of 93 to 2. The vote in the
House was 392 to 4,"
The legal authority of the President of the
United States to conduct the present war, for
"the maintenance of international peace and
security in Southeast Asia," which, as the
Congress declared in its 1964 resolution, "the
United States regards as vital to its national
interest and to world peace," is surely sus-
tained amply by the composite impact of
that resolution, the terms of the SEATO
Treaty ratified by the Senate and the appro-
priations made by the Congress to support
the military aotions in the treaty area.
That the memorandum of the Lawyers
Committee on American Policy Toward Viet-
nam is grounded on an emotional attitude
opposed to United States policy, rather than
on law, is not only demonstrated by a look
at the facts, but is emphasized by the memo-
randum's concluding paragraph:
"Should we not, twenty years after Presi-
dent Roosevelt's hopeful dream?twenty
years after the advent of the nuclear age
with the awesome potentiality of incinera-
tion of our planet and the annihilation of
our civilization and the culture of millenia?
Should we not 'spell the end of the system
of unilateral action . . . that has been tried
for centuries--and has always failed'?" 00
Contrasted with the tone and substance
of that memorandum is the temperate state-
,
" Id. at 4192.
" Id. at 4226.
" Id, at 4233. Only Senators MORSE and
GRUE/VING voted against the appropriation.
It was announced that five senators, neces-
sarily absent, would each have voted "yea";.
so that a full vote would have been 98 to 2.
Id. at 4232.
6, Hearings 593. On May 4, 1965, President
Johnson had requested "the Congress to ap-
propriate, at the earliest possible moment,
an additional $700 million to meet mounting
military requirements in Vietnam". He ex-
plained, in his message to the Congress, that
"this is not a routine appropriation. For
each Member of Congress who supports this
request is also voting to persist in our effort
to halt Communist aggression in South Viet-
nam. Each is saying that the Congress and
the President stand united before the world
in joint determination that the independ-
ence of South Vietnam shall be preserved
and Communist attack will not succeed."
H.R. Doc. No. 157, 89th Cong., 1st Sess.
(1965). The appropriation bill (79 Stat. 109)
was passed in the Senate, 88 to 3, and in the
House, 408 to 7. 111 CONG. REC. 9210, 9435
(1965).
39 112 CONG. REC. 4297-4298 (1966).
6? Hearings, Appendix 713.
ment of thirty-one professors of international
law from leading law schools throughout the
United States, which recites simply that they
"wish to affirm that the presence of US forces
in South Vietnam at the request of the
Government of that country is lawful under
general principles of international law and
the United Nations Charter. The engage-
ment of US forces in hostilities at the request
of the Government of South Vietnam is a
legitimate use of force in defense of South
Vietnam against aggression." 61
Contrasted also with the tone and temper
of the memorandum of the Lawyers of the
memorandum of the Lawyers Committee
on American Policy Towards Vietnam is the
simple resolution adopted unanimously on
February 21, 1966, by the House of Delegates
of the American Bar Association 'Onthe joint
recommendation of its Standing Committee
on Peace and Law Through United Nations
and its Section of International and Com-
parative Law." The resolution is supported
by a brief report, which concludes "that the
position of the United States in Vietnam is
legal under international law, and is in ac-
cordance with the Charter of the United
Nations and the South-East Asia Treaty"."
These conclusions as to the legality of the
presence of the United States forces in Viet-
nam under the Constitution of the States, as
a question of domestic law, are those of t e
author. They were not included in the op -
ion of the thirty-one professors of intern -
tional law or in the resolution of the
lean Bar Association,
THE STATUS OF THE NATIONAL
LIBERATION FRONT IN SOUTH
VIETNAM
Mr. LONG of Louisiana. Mr. Presi-
dent, in the New York Times for May
2, one of its staff writers, Neil Sheehan,
outlines the evidence we have concerning
the status of the so-called National Lib-
eration Front in South Vietnam, and he
brings up to date the chronicle of events
by which this phony organization has
been promoted. As in other presenta-
tions on this subject, the Times article
reveals clearly that the NLF is nothing
more than an instrument of Hanoi?and
perhaps not even a tool which its mas-
ters trust to any great extent.
One of the most important questions
for any pretended national political or-
ganization is whether it controls and
directs the armed forces withwhich it is
associated. It is clear that the NLF does
not control the Vietcong forces; that task
is handled by a group called the Central
Office for South Vietnam, which is the
Communist headquarters for the south
and reports directly to the politburo of
the Communist Party in Hanoi.
The NLF is the supposedly political
and administrative arm of Hanoi, but,
even in these activities, it is subject to
the direction of the same people who di-
rect the Central Office for South Viet-
nam, or COSVIN, as it is called. This
is done through the key memberships
which the COSVIN holds in the commit-
tees of the NLF. Thus, Mr. Sheehan
says:
The front's committees appear to be ap-
pended to the party committees at various
levels and, although the party members act
in the name of the front, they receive their
orders through party channels. In much the
'1i2 CONG. REC. A-410 (1966).
52 A.B.A.J. 392 (1966).
03112 CONG. REC. 4853-4854 (1966) .
same manner, the Communist Party controls
the governmental machinery in the North,
by making certain that party members hold
the important positions at all levels.
There is no evidence that the front's
presidium and central committee exercise
any independent direction over the front's
mass organizations and local committees.
There is no question, Mr. President,
that all of the efforts being made in
South Vietnam to subvert its people and
destroy its government at all levels are
directly under the strict supervision of
the Comm'unist